Return to Home Incidence > Table

Incidence Rates Table

Data Options

Incidence Rate Report for Oklahoma by County

Lung & Bronchus (All Stages^), 2016-2020

All Races (includes Hispanic), Both Sexes, All Ages

Sorted by Count
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 ascending
Recent Trend
Recent 5-Year Trend in Incidence Rates
(95% Confidence Interval)
 sort by trend descending
Oklahoma 6 63.2 (62.2, 64.2) N/A 3,074 falling falling trend -1.7 (-2.1, -1.3)
US (SEER+NPCR) 1 54.0 (53.9, 54.1) N/A 215,307 falling falling trend -1.8 (-2.0, -1.7)
Oklahoma County 6 56.3 (54.0, 58.6) 56 (46, 64) 485 falling falling trend -2.2 (-2.7, -1.7)
Tulsa County 6 57.1 (54.6, 59.6) 53 (45, 64) 422 falling falling trend -2.2 (-2.6, -1.7)
Cleveland County 6 51.9 (48.2, 55.7) 65 (51, 71) 157 falling falling trend -2.6 (-4.0, -1.1)
Comanche County 6 70.5 (63.9, 77.6) 29 (13, 52) 86 stable stable trend -0.9 (-2.7, 1.1)
Canadian County 6 55.1 (49.9, 60.8) 58 (42, 70) 85 falling falling trend -1.8 (-3.1, -0.2)
Creek County 6 79.9 (72.2, 88.4) 19 (3, 36) 80 stable stable trend -1.4 (-2.8, 0.2)
Rogers County 6 68.0 (61.4, 75.1) 31 (18, 54) 80 stable stable trend 2.1 (-5.5, 9.1)
Pottawatomie County 6 77.9 (69.9, 86.5) 22 (3, 42) 72 stable stable trend 8.6 (-1.1, 16.1)
Muskogee County 6 79.7 (71.6, 88.6) 20 (2, 41) 72 stable stable trend -0.3 (-1.7, 1.0)
Wagoner County 6 58.3 (51.8, 65.3) 52 (32, 68) 61 falling falling trend -1.9 (-3.1, -0.6)
Le Flore County 6 80.7 (71.3, 91.2) 15 (1, 40) 55 stable stable trend -1.3 (-3.1, 0.7)
Pittsburg County 6 80.1 (70.6, 90.7) 16 (2, 41) 53 stable stable trend -0.9 (-2.6, 1.0)
Payne County 6 64.0 (56.3, 72.5) 46 (20, 64) 51 stable stable trend -1.7 (-3.3, 0.0)
Sequoyah County 6 86.4 (76.0, 98.0) 6 (1, 33) 51 stable stable trend -1.0 (-3.7, 2.0)
Washington County 6 67.1 (59.0, 76.2) 33 (12, 59) 51 stable stable trend -0.2 (-1.4, 1.0)
Kay County 6 80.0 (70.2, 91.0) 17 (1, 43) 50 stable stable trend 1.5 (-1.2, 10.0)
Grady County 6 66.8 (58.5, 76.1) 36 (14, 61) 49 stable stable trend 5.5 (-0.4, 10.5)
Cherokee County 6 76.8 (67.2, 87.5) 24 (3, 48) 47 stable stable trend 0.2 (-1.2, 1.9)
Mayes County 6 76.8 (66.9, 87.9) 23 (2, 49) 45 falling falling trend -1.6 (-3.0, -0.2)
Okmulgee County 6 80.9 (70.3, 92.8) 13 (1, 43) 44 falling falling trend -2.0 (-6.9, -0.6)
Stephens County 6 65.7 (57.0, 75.6) 41 (15, 63) 43 falling falling trend -2.2 (-3.7, -0.8)
Carter County 6 65.8 (57.1, 75.6) 40 (12, 64) 42 falling falling trend -2.5 (-4.1, -1.0)
Bryan County 6 65.9 (57.2, 75.8) 39 (15, 63) 42 falling falling trend -2.6 (-4.1, -1.0)
Osage County 6 56.6 (49.0, 65.2) 55 (31, 71) 41 stable stable trend -1.8 (-4.5, 1.0)
Delaware County 6 53.3 (45.9, 61.7) 63 (38, 72) 41 falling falling trend -2.7 (-4.7, -0.8)
Garfield County 6 51.2 (44.3, 58.9) 66 (43, 73) 40 stable stable trend -1.2 (-3.4, 1.1)
McCurtain County 6 85.9 (74.1, 99.2) 7 (1, 38) 39 stable stable trend -1.4 (-3.4, 0.7)
Logan County 6 59.7 (51.2, 69.4) 49 (24, 69) 36 stable stable trend -0.9 (-2.8, 1.4)
Ottawa County 6 80.0 (68.4, 93.2) 18 (1, 46) 35 stable stable trend -1.6 (-3.3, 0.0)
McClain County 6 69.1 (59.1, 80.5) 30 (7, 62) 35 falling falling trend -2.4 (-4.0, -0.7)
Lincoln County 6 65.6 (55.9, 76.8) 42 (12, 66) 33 stable stable trend -1.9 (-4.2, 0.5)
Pontotoc County 6 65.0 (55.3, 76.0) 44 (13, 66) 33 stable stable trend -1.0 (-2.7, 0.8)
McIntosh County 6 80.9 (67.5, 96.7) 14 (1, 50) 29 stable stable trend -1.5 (-4.4, 1.3)
Garvin County 6 66.9 (55.6, 80.1) 34 (7, 67) 25 stable stable trend -1.9 (-5.1, 1.2)
Adair County 6 84.5 (69.8, 101.6) 10 (1, 48) 24 stable stable trend -0.3 (-2.7, 2.6)
Marshall County 6 86.9 (71.1, 105.7) 4 (1, 46) 23 stable stable trend -1.0 (-3.9, 2.1)
Caddo County 6 56.1 (46.0, 67.9) 57 (24, 73) 22 falling falling trend -7.3 (-16.3, -4.0)
Pawnee County 6 81.5 (66.2, 99.7) 12 (1, 56) 20 stable stable trend -0.2 (-4.4, 4.3)
Seminole County 6 59.5 (48.4, 72.6) 50 (17, 72) 20 falling falling trend -2.5 (-3.6, -1.4)
Custer County 6 53.8 (43.0, 66.6) 61 (26, 73) 18 stable stable trend -1.6 (-4.3, 1.1)
Beckham County 6 66.9 (53.2, 83.2) 35 (4, 70) 17 stable stable trend -0.7 (-5.1, 3.7)
Choctaw County 6 73.6 (58.3, 92.1) 27 (1, 66) 17 falling falling trend -4.1 (-7.0, -1.6)
Craig County 6 76.4 (60.7, 95.4) 25 (1, 63) 17 stable stable trend -1.7 (-4.1, 0.7)
Haskell County 6 82.6 (65.3, 103.8) 11 (1, 58) 16 stable stable trend -1.0 (-4.4, 2.5)
Jackson County 6 50.5 (39.6, 63.7) 68 (33, 74) 15 falling falling trend -3.7 (-6.1, -1.6)
Okfuskee County 6 86.6 (67.7, 109.7) 5 (1, 57) 15 stable stable trend 2.0 (-0.4, 4.8)
Murray County 6 72.3 (56.1, 92.1) 28 (1, 68) 14 stable stable trend -1.4 (-3.4, 0.5)
Pushmataha County 6 78.3 (60.8, 100.1) 21 (1, 65) 14 stable stable trend -3.4 (-7.3, 0.1)
Latimer County 6 85.4 (66.3, 109.3) 8 (1, 58) 14 rising rising trend 8.0 (0.8, 26.2)
Nowata County 6 87.8 (68.3, 112.1) 3 (1, 55) 14 stable stable trend 0.9 (-2.4, 4.9)
Atoka County 6 64.9 (49.9, 83.4) 45 (4, 72) 13 stable stable trend -8.5 (-22.7, 0.5)
Hughes County 6 66.3 (50.7, 85.7) 37 (2, 72) 13 stable stable trend -1.1 (-3.9, 1.8)
Woodward County 6 50.7 (38.7, 65.3) 67 (28, 74) 12 stable stable trend -2.6 (-7.2, 1.7)
Johnston County 6 74.4 (56.2, 97.3) 26 (1, 71) 12 stable stable trend -1.9 (-4.7, 1.1)
Love County 6 84.8 (64.1, 110.6) 9 (1, 65) 12 stable stable trend 0.3 (-4.2, 5.3)
Noble County 6 60.9 (45.1, 81.1) 48 (4, 74) 10 stable stable trend -1.7 (-5.0, 1.7)
Washita County 6 65.5 (48.4, 87.4) 43 (2, 73) 10 stable stable trend -1.3 (-4.9, 2.2)
Kingfisher County 6 45.3 (33.1, 60.9) 71 (33, 74) 9 falling falling trend -20.8 (-38.0, -2.2)
Jefferson County 6 88.4 (63.6, 121.3) 2 (1, 66) 9 stable stable trend -1.9 (-6.4, 2.6)
Kiowa County 6 59.4 (42.0, 82.6) 51 (4, 74) 8 stable stable trend -0.7 (-3.7, 2.4)
Texas County 6 37.4 (26.4, 51.5) 74 (53, 74) 8 falling falling trend -3.9 (-7.3, -0.7)
Blaine County 6 47.6 (32.1, 68.8) 70 (19, 74) 6 stable stable trend -3.1 (-6.8, 0.2)
Woods County 6 54.2 (37.0, 77.7) 60 (7, 74) 6 stable stable trend -0.4 (-2.6, 1.7)
Coal County 6 67.6 (45.3, 98.9) 32 (1, 74) 6 stable stable trend -3.4 (-8.0, 0.9)
Cotton County 6 62.4 (40.8, 93.3) 47 (1, 74) 5 stable stable trend -0.2 (-3.3, 3.2)
Major County 6 44.4 (29.0, 66.5) 72 (24, 74) 5 stable stable trend 1.7 (-2.1, 6.4)
Harper County 6 90.5 (58.1, 137.1) 1 (1, 71) 5 stable stable trend -0.4 (-6.0, 5.2)
Tillman County 6 44.4 (28.6, 67.2) 73 (23, 74) 5 falling falling trend -4.0 (-8.3, -0.3)
Alfalfa County 6 53.7 (34.3, 82.2) 62 (4, 74) 5 stable stable trend -3.3 (-8.4, 1.7)
Ellis County 6 66.3 (41.3, 104.2) 38 (1, 74) 4 stable stable trend -2.7 (-10.0, 4.1)
Dewey County 6 52.9 (31.7, 85.0) 64 (2, 74) 4 stable stable trend -2.0 (-10.2, 5.7)
Grant County 6 54.5 (32.5, 88.8) 59 (2, 74) 4
*
*
Greer County 6 49.5 (29.7, 78.9) 69 (4, 74) 4 stable stable trend 0.9 (-3.0, 5.2)
Roger Mills County 6 56.7 (32.9, 94.9) 54 (1, 74) 3
*
*
Beaver County 6
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Cimarron County 6
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Harmon County 6
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Notes:
Created by statecancerprofiles.cancer.gov on 04/23/2024 8:47 pm.

State Cancer Registries may provide more current or more local data.

Data cannot be shown for the following areas. For more information on what areas are suppressed or not available, please refer to the table.
Beaver, Cimarron, Harmon

† 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.
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.
⋔ 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.

* Data has been suppressed to ensure confidentiality and stability of rate estimates. Counts are suppressed if fewer than 16 records were reported in a specific area-sex-race category. If an average count of 3 is shown, the total number of cases for the time period is 16 or more which exceeds suppression threshold (but is rounded to 3).

Source: SEER and NPCR data. For more specific information please see the table.
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