Return to Home Incidence > Table

Incidence Rates Table

Data Options

Incidence Rate Report for South Carolina by County

All Cancer Sites (All Stages^), 2015-2019

All Races (includes Hispanic), Male, All Ages

Sorted by Recentaapc
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
South Carolina 6 494.0 (490.3, 497.7) N/A 14,688 falling falling trend -1.7 (-1.9, -1.4)
US (SEER+NPCR) 1 488.3 (487.8, 488.7) N/A 875,592 falling falling trend -0.9 (-1.4, -0.5)
Horry County 6 462.0 (449.2, 475.1) 39 (30, 43) 1,144 falling falling trend -7.4 (-12.6, -1.9)
Florence County 6 544.7 (520.5, 569.8) 10 (2, 22) 412 stable stable trend -5.0 (-10.0, 0.3)
Clarendon County 6 489.2 (448.9, 532.6) 30 (6, 43) 121 falling falling trend -4.2 (-6.4, -1.8)
Beaufort County 6 407.6 (392.3, 423.5) 45 (41, 46) 619 falling falling trend -3.0 (-3.6, -2.3)
Bamberg County 6 491.1 (428.5, 561.2) 27 (2, 46) 49 falling falling trend -2.4 (-3.6, -1.2)
Dorchester County 6 480.0 (457.9, 503.0) 32 (18, 42) 386 falling falling trend -2.4 (-2.9, -1.9)
Fairfield County 6 470.1 (420.8, 524.4) 37 (7, 45) 77 falling falling trend -2.3 (-3.1, -1.5)
Kershaw County 6 481.8 (450.9, 514.4) 31 (13, 42) 196 falling falling trend -2.3 (-3.0, -1.6)
Orangeburg County 6 459.7 (433.5, 487.0) 40 (24, 44) 252 falling falling trend -2.3 (-3.0, -1.6)
Hampton County 6 440.0 (386.9, 498.6) 42 (13, 46) 53 falling falling trend -2.1 (-3.7, -0.5)
Richland County 6 474.8 (460.2, 489.7) 35 (24, 41) 878 falling falling trend -2.1 (-2.7, -1.6)
Berkeley County 6 489.4 (470.3, 509.1) 29 (16, 39) 540 falling falling trend -1.9 (-2.3, -1.5)
Charleston County 6 491.5 (478.1, 505.1) 26 (18, 36) 1,103 falling falling trend -1.9 (-2.4, -1.5)
Edgefield County 6 385.1 (345.0, 429.0) 46 (40, 46) 72 falling falling trend -1.9 (-3.4, -0.3)
Barnwell County 6 471.1 (417.3, 530.2) 36 (6, 46) 61 falling falling trend -1.8 (-3.1, -0.5)
Lexington County 6 479.1 (463.6, 495.0) 33 (22, 40) 772 falling falling trend -1.8 (-2.5, -1.1)
Newberry County 6 464.7 (425.6, 506.7) 38 (12, 45) 113 falling falling trend -1.7 (-2.3, -1.1)
York County 6 519.7 (502.0, 537.9) 16 (8, 29) 713 falling falling trend -1.7 (-2.3, -1.0)
Greenville County 6 511.0 (498.8, 523.4) 19 (12, 29) 1,412 falling falling trend -1.6 (-1.9, -1.4)
Jasper County 6 432.5 (389.3, 479.6) 43 (22, 46) 80 stable stable trend -1.5 (-3.2, 0.2)
Oconee County 6 509.6 (482.4, 538.2) 20 (6, 37) 295 falling falling trend -1.5 (-2.3, -0.6)
Colleton County 6 564.1 (521.4, 609.7) 4 (1, 26) 142 falling falling trend -1.4 (-2.2, -0.5)
Aiken County 6 430.9 (412.8, 449.6) 44 (37, 46) 460 falling falling trend -1.3 (-2.1, -0.6)
Calhoun County 6 474.9 (414.7, 542.4) 34 (4, 46) 49 stable stable trend -1.3 (-3.0, 0.4)
Greenwood County 6 505.6 (475.0, 537.8) 21 (7, 39) 213 falling falling trend -1.3 (-2.0, -0.6)
Marion County 6 545.2 (496.3, 597.8) 9 (1, 36) 103 stable stable trend -1.3 (-2.5, 0.0)
Anderson County 6 536.3 (517.3, 555.8) 13 (4, 23) 642 falling falling trend -1.2 (-1.7, -0.7)
Darlington County 6 499.1 (467.9, 532.0) 24 (8, 40) 208 falling falling trend -1.2 (-1.9, -0.5)
Spartanburg County 6 515.3 (499.8, 531.1) 18 (9, 29) 893 falling falling trend -1.2 (-1.6, -0.7)
Sumter County 6 540.3 (513.0, 568.7) 12 (2, 25) 311 falling falling trend -1.2 (-1.9, -0.5)
Chester County 6 551.3 (505.2, 600.9) 6 (1, 31) 114 falling falling trend -1.1 (-2.0, -0.2)
Lancaster County 6 493.3 (467.9, 519.8) 25 (11, 40) 302 falling falling trend -1.1 (-2.1, -0.1)
Marlboro County 6 545.9 (494.0, 602.0) 8 (1, 37) 89 stable stable trend -1.1 (-2.6, 0.4)
Pickens County 6 518.3 (494.1, 543.5) 17 (6, 32) 362 falling falling trend -1.0 (-1.5, -0.5)
Georgetown County 6 542.3 (510.8, 575.5) 11 (1, 26) 267 stable stable trend -0.9 (-1.9, 0.0)
Laurens County 6 548.4 (516.0, 582.4) 7 (1, 25) 230 falling falling trend -0.9 (-1.5, -0.3)
Saluda County 6 489.4 (436.6, 547.3) 28 (3, 45) 67 stable stable trend -0.9 (-2.2, 0.5)
Dillon County 6 531.5 (482.0, 585.0) 14 (1, 39) 91 stable stable trend -0.7 (-2.0, 0.6)
Allendale County 6 453.3 (376.3, 542.4) 41 (3, 46) 26 stable stable trend -0.6 (-2.2, 1.1)
Cherokee County 6 554.1 (517.4, 592.7) 5 (1, 25) 184 stable stable trend -0.5 (-1.2, 0.1)
Williamsburg County 6 598.3 (548.5, 651.6) 1 (1, 15) 119 stable stable trend -0.4 (-1.5, 0.7)
Chesterfield County 6 501.9 (464.6, 541.6) 22 (5, 41) 145 stable stable trend -0.3 (-1.2, 0.6)
Lee County 6 585.5 (519.9, 657.4) 2 (1, 30) 63 stable stable trend -0.3 (-1.7, 1.1)
Union County 6 580.7 (530.0, 635.3) 3 (1, 25) 106 stable stable trend -0.3 (-1.4, 0.8)
McCormick County 6 526.1 (460.6, 601.5) 15 (1, 44) 54 stable stable trend -0.2 (-1.8, 1.5)
Abbeville County 6 500.9 (452.6, 553.4) 23 (3, 43) 87 stable stable trend 1.6 (-1.8, 5.1)
Notes:
Created by statecancerprofiles.cancer.gov on 11/28/2022 3:06 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