Return to Home Incidence > Table

Incidence Rates Table

Data Options

Incidence Rate Report for North Carolina by County

Prostate (All Stages^), 2015-2019

All Races (includes Hispanic), Male, All Ages

Sorted by Name
County
 sort alphabetically by name ascending
Age-Adjusted Incidence Rate
cases per 100,000
(95% Confidence Interval)
 sort by rate descending
CI*Rank⋔
(95% Confidence Interval)
 sort by CI rank descending
Average Annual Count
 sort by count descending
Recent Trend
Recent 5-Year Trend in Incidence Rates
(95% Confidence Interval)
 sort by trend descending
North Carolina 6 122.9 (121.7, 124.2) N/A 7,569 stable stable trend 2.3 (-0.6, 5.3)
US (SEER+NPCR) 1 109.9 (109.7, 110.2) N/A 211,245 stable stable trend 1.9 (-0.8, 4.6)
Yancey County 6 81.0 (61.8, 105.8) 98 (48, 100) 12 falling falling trend -6.7 (-9.8, -3.5)
Yadkin County 6 81.3 (66.7, 98.7) 97 (64, 100) 22 falling falling trend -3.8 (-6.4, -1.2)
Wilson County 6 116.0 (102.7, 130.6) 48 (10, 86) 59 falling falling trend -2.8 (-4.8, -0.8)
Wilkes County 6 81.5 (70.8, 93.7) 96 (75, 100) 43 falling falling trend -4.8 (-7.0, -2.4)
Wayne County 6 127.9 (116.2, 140.5) 24 (4, 65) 92 falling falling trend -1.7 (-3.0, -0.3)
Watauga County 6 109.3 (93.5, 127.4) 65 (16, 95) 36 stable stable trend -2.3 (-4.7, 0.1)
Washington County 6 113.9 (85.9, 150.6) 55 (2, 99) 12 stable stable trend -3.1 (-6.1, 0.0)
Warren County 6 119.9 (97.3, 147.4) 37 (1, 95) 21 stable stable trend -1.8 (-5.8, 2.3)
Wake County 6 141.3 (136.4, 146.2) 8 (3, 23) 709 rising rising trend 3.6 (0.5, 6.7)
Vance County 6 107.6 (90.4, 127.4) 68 (12, 97) 30 falling falling trend -5.2 (-7.1, -3.3)
Union County 6 135.1 (125.7, 144.9) 17 (4, 42) 167 stable stable trend -1.1 (-2.4, 0.2)
Tyrrell County 6 162.0 (101.8, 248.1) 1 (1, 99) 5 stable stable trend 2.4 (-2.4, 7.5)
Transylvania County 6 100.6 (85.5, 118.4) 81 (28, 99) 34 stable stable trend 3.4 (-3.8, 11.2)
Swain County 6 112.3 (83.9, 148.3) 59 (1, 99) 11 stable stable trend 0.3 (-3.6, 4.3)
Surry County 6 102.6 (90.3, 116.3) 78 (30, 95) 52 falling falling trend -2.0 (-3.8, -0.2)
Stokes County 6 95.6 (81.3, 112.1) 87 (37, 99) 33 stable stable trend -0.6 (-2.5, 1.3)
Stanly County 6 120.0 (105.4, 136.2) 36 (4, 84) 51 stable stable trend -0.5 (-2.5, 1.4)
Scotland County 6 90.1 (72.9, 110.4) 91 (33, 100) 20 falling falling trend -10.8 (-14.7, -6.7)
Sampson County 6 137.3 (121.3, 155.0) 13 (1, 61) 56 stable stable trend -0.6 (-2.4, 1.3)
Rutherford County 6 115.3 (102.1, 130.1) 50 (11, 87) 58 stable stable trend -1.4 (-3.2, 0.5)
Rowan County 6 119.8 (109.7, 130.7) 39 (12, 75) 109 falling falling trend -3.3 (-5.1, -1.5)
Rockingham County 6 118.9 (107.2, 131.6) 42 (13, 80) 80 stable stable trend -1.3 (-2.6, 0.0)
Robeson County 6 119.0 (107.9, 130.9) 41 (12, 78) 91 falling falling trend -4.6 (-5.9, -3.2)
Richmond County 6 116.7 (99.2, 136.6) 46 (5, 92) 33 stable stable trend 12.1 (-1.2, 27.3)
Randolph County 6 117.4 (107.7, 127.9) 44 (18, 78) 112 falling falling trend -2.4 (-3.4, -1.4)
Polk County 6 119.9 (98.8, 145.8) 38 (2, 93) 24 stable stable trend 0.4 (-1.8, 2.5)
Pitt County 6 113.2 (102.9, 124.3) 57 (20, 85) 96 falling falling trend -4.0 (-5.3, -2.7)
Person County 6 107.2 (90.4, 126.6) 69 (13, 97) 31 falling falling trend -4.3 (-6.1, -2.5)
Perquimans County 6 121.5 (95.0, 155.6) 33 (1, 98) 15 stable stable trend -0.6 (-3.0, 1.9)
Pender County 6 120.4 (105.3, 137.2) 35 (6, 85) 49 stable stable trend -1.0 (-2.6, 0.7)
Pasquotank County 6 140.8 (119.9, 164.5) 9 (1, 69) 34 falling falling trend -2.0 (-3.6, -0.5)
Pamlico County 6 123.2 (96.4, 157.7) 31 (1, 97) 16 falling falling trend -3.6 (-5.7, -1.4)
Orange County 6 108.0 (97.4, 119.5) 67 (27, 90) 83 stable stable trend 5.5 (-4.5, 16.4)
Onslow County 6 124.2 (112.4, 136.8) 30 (7, 71) 85 falling falling trend -1.6 (-2.9, -0.2)
Northampton County 6 129.7 (105.8, 158.5) 21 (1, 92) 22 falling falling trend -4.3 (-5.9, -2.7)
New Hanover County 6 113.7 (105.8, 122.0) 56 (27, 79) 161 stable stable trend 9.9 (-5.4, 27.5)
Nash County 6 109.3 (97.7, 122.0) 66 (26, 90) 69 falling falling trend -3.0 (-4.7, -1.4)
Moore County 6 136.0 (124.3, 148.7) 15 (2, 48) 103 stable stable trend -1.4 (-3.0, 0.3)
Montgomery County 6 89.5 (71.6, 111.3) 92 (29, 100) 18 falling falling trend -7.8 (-12.8, -2.5)
Mitchell County 6 93.8 (71.8, 122.4) 88 (18, 100) 13 falling falling trend -2.7 (-4.8, -0.5)
Mecklenburg County 6 152.1 (147.0, 157.4) 4 (1, 10) 732 rising rising trend 2.5 (0.1, 4.9)
McDowell County 6 85.4 (71.7, 101.4) 95 (57, 100) 29 falling falling trend -3.8 (-5.4, -2.2)
Martin County 6 133.4 (109.7, 161.7) 19 (1, 84) 24 stable stable trend 2.5 (-2.2, 7.5)
Madison County 6 87.7 (68.3, 111.8) 93 (34, 100) 15 falling falling trend -4.5 (-6.5, -2.5)
Macon County 6 100.9 (85.6, 118.9) 80 (26, 98) 33 falling falling trend -2.8 (-4.3, -1.3)
Lincoln County 6 117.4 (104.9, 131.0) 45 (13, 83) 69 falling falling trend -2.9 (-4.6, -1.2)
Lenoir County 6 142.6 (125.8, 161.3) 6 (1, 51) 55 falling falling trend -3.8 (-5.6, -1.9)
Lee County 6 136.4 (119.7, 154.9) 14 (1, 65) 51 stable stable trend -1.5 (-3.4, 0.5)
Jones County 6 155.0 (117.3, 203.5) 3 (1, 87) 12 stable stable trend -1.3 (-4.0, 1.5)
Johnston County 6 126.7 (116.9, 137.1) 27 (8, 64) 136 falling falling trend -1.7 (-2.7, -0.6)
Jackson County 6 90.7 (75.3, 108.7) 90 (41, 100) 26 stable stable trend 6.5 (-12.7, 30.0)
Iredell County 6 133.9 (124.1, 144.4) 18 (4, 46) 145 stable stable trend 7.2 (-2.8, 18.3)
Hyde County 6 116.3 (72.7, 180.6) 47 (1, 100) 5 stable stable trend -2.5 (-6.7, 2.0)
Hoke County 6 127.4 (106.8, 150.9) 25 (1, 88) 30 stable stable trend -2.0 (-4.1, 0.2)
Hertford County 6 106.7 (85.3, 132.5) 70 (7, 99) 18 falling falling trend -8.3 (-12.5, -3.8)
Henderson County 6 112.2 (102.8, 122.4) 60 (24, 86) 109 stable stable trend 2.4 (-3.6, 8.9)
Haywood County 6 110.9 (98.2, 125.1) 62 (19, 91) 58 falling falling trend -2.2 (-3.9, -0.5)
Harnett County 6 119.5 (107.5, 132.5) 40 (10, 79) 78 falling falling trend -2.7 (-3.9, -1.5)
Halifax County 6 141.7 (124.4, 161.0) 7 (1, 54) 51 falling falling trend -1.8 (-3.2, -0.3)
Guilford County 6 139.4 (133.3, 145.7) 11 (3, 27) 411 falling falling trend -2.6 (-3.8, -1.4)
Greene County 6 103.7 (79.9, 132.7) 77 (6, 100) 14 falling falling trend -3.6 (-5.9, -1.4)
Granville County 6 126.1 (110.7, 143.3) 29 (3, 77) 52 stable stable trend 8.3 (-6.5, 25.5)
Graham County 6 54.9 (33.2, 89.1) 100 (70, 100) 4 stable stable trend -3.8 (-7.4, 0.0)
Gates County 6 75.9 (52.5, 108.6) 99 (29, 100) 7 falling falling trend -5.7 (-9.6, -1.6)
Gaston County 6 114.7 (106.5, 123.5) 52 (23, 78) 153 stable stable trend 5.8 (-7.5, 21.1)
Franklin County 6 131.2 (115.8, 148.2) 20 (2, 72) 57 stable stable trend 8.4 (-1.4, 19.2)
Forsyth County 6 118.3 (111.7, 125.1) 43 (23, 68) 256 stable stable trend 0.7 (-7.2, 9.2)
Edgecombe County 6 140.5 (123.2, 159.9) 10 (1, 58) 50 stable stable trend 14.0 (-5.4, 37.4)
Durham County 6 129.6 (121.4, 138.2) 22 (7, 49) 200 stable stable trend 5.8 (-1.6, 13.8)
Duplin County 6 109.4 (94.9, 125.7) 64 (17, 94) 43 stable stable trend -1.5 (-3.4, 0.5)
Davie County 6 87.0 (73.1, 103.3) 94 (54, 100) 28 falling falling trend -3.4 (-6.0, -0.8)
Davidson County 6 99.9 (91.6, 108.8) 83 (51, 94) 112 stable stable trend 0.2 (-4.5, 5.1)
Dare County 6 105.8 (89.4, 124.8) 73 (15, 97) 32 falling falling trend -2.6 (-4.5, -0.6)
Currituck County 6 96.1 (76.7, 119.6) 86 (18, 100) 18 falling falling trend -3.6 (-6.2, -0.9)
Cumberland County 6 126.9 (118.7, 135.5) 26 (10, 57) 189 falling falling trend -1.8 (-2.7, -0.8)
Craven County 6 145.1 (132.2, 158.9) 5 (1, 34) 97 falling falling trend -3.0 (-4.7, -1.3)
Columbus County 6 112.1 (97.4, 128.7) 61 (14, 92) 44 falling falling trend -2.7 (-4.5, -0.8)
Cleveland County 6 114.4 (102.7, 127.2) 53 (16, 87) 75 stable stable trend 5.7 (-6.0, 18.9)
Clay County 6 102.0 (75.8, 137.5) 79 (4, 100) 11 stable stable trend -3.3 (-6.6, 0.1)
Chowan County 6 112.4 (85.8, 146.3) 58 (2, 99) 13 stable stable trend -2.1 (-4.8, 0.7)
Cherokee County 6 98.1 (81.6, 118.1) 84 (26, 99) 27 stable stable trend 0.0 (-3.0, 3.1)
Chatham County 6 121.2 (108.5, 135.4) 34 (7, 80) 69 stable stable trend 4.0 (-3.0, 11.6)
Catawba County 6 128.7 (118.9, 139.1) 23 (5, 60) 135 stable stable trend -1.3 (-2.6, 0.0)
Caswell County 6 138.2 (114.2, 166.7) 12 (1, 81) 25 falling falling trend -2.1 (-3.7, -0.3)
Carteret County 6 91.9 (81.3, 103.9) 89 (57, 99) 57 falling falling trend -5.1 (-6.2, -4.0)
Camden County 6 122.8 (86.7, 170.0) 32 (1, 99) 8 stable stable trend -3.4 (-7.3, 0.7)
Caldwell County 6 97.1 (85.9, 109.5) 85 (44, 97) 58 stable stable trend -1.7 (-3.5, 0.0)
Cabarrus County 6 135.7 (125.9, 146.2) 16 (3, 43) 149 rising rising trend 5.2 (2.3, 8.3)
Burke County 6 110.7 (99.4, 123.0) 63 (19, 88) 73 stable stable trend 10.3 (-7.0, 30.9)
Buncombe County 6 100.2 (93.6, 107.3) 82 (55, 92) 176 falling falling trend -6.0 (-8.1, -3.8)
Brunswick County 6 105.5 (97.6, 114.2) 74 (41, 88) 152 stable stable trend -1.0 (-2.7, 0.7)
Bladen County 6 104.3 (86.7, 125.0) 75 (16, 99) 27 falling falling trend -2.1 (-3.8, -0.4)
Bertie County 6 126.4 (101.3, 156.9) 28 (1, 94) 19 falling falling trend -4.3 (-6.2, -2.4)
Beaufort County 6 103.9 (89.4, 120.5) 76 (22, 97) 39 stable stable trend 10.6 (-0.3, 22.6)
Avery County 6 114.2 (90.2, 143.7) 54 (3, 98) 16 falling falling trend -2.2 (-4.0, -0.3)
Ashe County 6 106.1 (87.7, 128.0) 72 (13, 98) 25 falling falling trend -3.7 (-5.8, -1.5)
Anson County 6 160.8 (133.7, 192.4) 2 (1, 49) 26 stable stable trend 0.7 (-1.5, 3.0)
Alleghany County 6 106.3 (79.5, 142.2) 71 (3, 100) 11 stable stable trend -2.3 (-4.8, 0.3)
Alexander County 6 115.4 (97.8, 135.6) 49 (7, 91) 32 falling falling trend -1.9 (-3.6, -0.2)
Alamance County 6 115.2 (105.8, 125.2) 51 (20, 79) 114 falling falling trend -3.0 (-4.6, -1.3)
Notes:
Created by statecancerprofiles.cancer.gov on 11/26/2022 7:27 am.

State Cancer Registries may provide more current or more local data.
Trend
Rising when 95% confidence interval of average annual percent change is above 0.
Stable when 95% confidence interval of average annual percent change includes 0.
Falling when 95% confidence interval of average annual percent change is below 0.

⋔ Results presented with the CI*Rank statistics help show the usefulness of ranks. For example, ranks for relatively rare diseases or less populated areas may be essentially meaningless because of their large variability, but ranks for more common diseases in densely populated regions can be very useful. More information about methodology can be found on the CI*Rank website.

† Incidence rates (cases per 100,000 population per year) are age-adjusted to the 2000 US standard population (19 age groups: <1, 1-4, 5-9, ... , 80-84, 85+). Rates are for invasive cancer only (except for bladder cancer which is invasive and in situ) or unless otherwise specified. Rates calculated using SEER*Stat. Population counts for denominators are based on Census populations as modified by NCI. The US Population Data File is used for SEER and NPCR incidence rates.
‡ Incidence data come from different sources. Due to different years of data availability, most of the trends are AAPCs based on APCs but some are APCs calculated in SEER*Stat. Please refer to the source for each area for additional information.

Rates and trends are computed using different standards for malignancy. For more information see malignant.html.

^ All Stages refers to any stage in the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) summary stage.

1 Source: National Program of Cancer Registries and Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results SEER*Stat Database (2001-2019) - United States Department of Health and Human Services, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and National Cancer Institute. Based on the 2021 submission.
6 Source: National Program of Cancer Registries SEER*Stat Database (2001-2019) - United States Department of Health and Human Services, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (based on the 2021 submission).
8 Source: Incidence data provided by the SEER Program. AAPCs are calculated by the Joinpoint Regression Program and are based on APCs. Data are age-adjusted to the 2000 US standard population (19 age groups: <1, 1-4, 5-9, ... , 80-84,85+). Rates are for invasive cancer only (except for bladder cancer which is invasive and in situ) or unless otherwise specified. Population counts for denominators are based on Census populations as modifed by NCI. The US Population Data File is used with SEER November 2021 data.

Interpret Rankings provides insight into interpreting cancer incidence statistics. When the population size for a denominator is small, the rates may be unstable. A rate is unstable when a small change in the numerator (e.g., only one or two additional cases) has a dramatic effect on the calculated rate.

Data for the United States does not include data from Nevada.
Data for the United States does not include Puerto Rico.

When displaying county information, the CI*Rank for the state is not shown because it's not comparable. To see the state CI*Rank please view the statistics at the US By State level.

Return to Top