Return to Home Incidence > Table

Incidence Rates Table

Data Options

Incidence Rate Report for South Carolina by County

Colon & Rectum (All Stages^), 2014-2018

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

Sorted by Rate
County
 sort alphabetically by name ascending
Met Healthy People Objective of 39.9?
Age-Adjusted Incidence Rate
cases per 100,000
(95% Confidence Interval)
 sort by rate ascending
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 Yes 37.6 (36.8, 38.3) N/A 2,275 stable stable trend -1.3 (-2.8, 0.1)
US (SEER+NPCR) 1 Yes 38.0 (37.9, 38.1) N/A 143,200 falling falling trend -1.8 (-2.3, -1.2)
Marion County 6 No 58.3 (47.9, 70.5) 1 (1, 20) 24 stable stable trend 0.8 (-1.4, 3.1)
Williamsburg County 6 No 57.6 (47.4, 69.5) 2 (1, 20) 24 stable stable trend 0.0 (-2.5, 2.5)
Saluda County 6 No 52.4 (40.3, 67.1) 3 (1, 37) 14 stable stable trend 1.3 (-2.6, 5.2)
Dillon County 6 No 50.6 (40.7, 62.3) 4 (1, 34) 19 stable stable trend -2.0 (-5.4, 1.5)
Orangeburg County 6 No 49.8 (43.9, 56.4) 5 (1, 23) 56 stable stable trend -1.5 (-3.2, 0.2)
Union County 6 No 47.2 (37.7, 58.6) 6 (1, 41) 19 stable stable trend -1.9 (-4.7, 0.9)
Darlington County 6 No 46.9 (40.5, 54.0) 7 (2, 31) 41 falling falling trend -2.2 (-3.8, -0.6)
Calhoun County 6 No 46.8 (33.8, 63.6) 8 (1, 46) 10 stable stable trend -2.4 (-5.4, 0.7)
Newberry County 6 No 46.4 (38.1, 56.2) 9 (1, 40) 23 stable stable trend -2.1 (-5.3, 1.1)
Laurens County 6 No 46.4 (40.0, 53.6) 10 (2, 33) 40 falling falling trend -2.5 (-3.9, -1.0)
Hampton County 6 No 45.9 (34.3, 60.3) 11 (1, 46) 11 stable stable trend -2.8 (-6.3, 0.8)
Colleton County 6 No 45.8 (37.5, 55.6) 12 (1, 41) 23 stable stable trend -1.2 (-3.6, 1.3)
Anderson County 6 No 45.5 (41.7, 49.5) 13 (4, 25) 114 falling falling trend -2.5 (-3.9, -1.1)
Cherokee County 6 No 44.3 (37.3, 52.2) 14 (2, 40) 31 stable stable trend -1.5 (-3.1, 0.2)
McCormick County 6 No 43.7 (30.1, 63.6) 15 (1, 46) 8 stable stable trend -0.8 (-4.7, 3.2)
Fairfield County 6 No 43.6 (33.3, 56.2) 16 (1, 46) 14 stable stable trend -2.1 (-4.8, 0.6)
Marlboro County 6 No 43.5 (33.9, 55.3) 17 (1, 45) 15 stable stable trend -0.2 (-2.9, 2.5)
Chesterfield County 6 No 42.5 (35.3, 50.9) 18 (3, 44) 26 stable stable trend -1.5 (-3.1, 0.2)
Greenwood County 6 No 42.4 (36.3, 49.3) 19 (4, 42) 37 falling falling trend -2.6 (-4.2, -1.0)
Lee County 6 No 41.9 (30.3, 56.6) 20 (1, 46) 10 stable stable trend -2.4 (-5.6, 1.0)
Florence County 6 No 41.3 (37.0, 46.0) 21 (8, 38) 70 falling falling trend -2.8 (-4.0, -1.6)
Abbeville County 6 No 41.3 (32.0, 52.7) 22 (2, 46) 15 falling falling trend -3.7 (-6.1, -1.2)
Chester County 6 No 41.0 (32.6, 51.1) 23 (3, 46) 18 falling falling trend -5.0 (-7.2, -2.7)
Jasper County 6 No 40.9 (31.8, 52.0) 24 (2, 46) 15 stable stable trend -1.9 (-4.6, 0.8)
Pickens County 6 No 40.7 (36.1, 45.8) 25 (8, 41) 58 stable stable trend -0.5 (-1.6, 0.5)
Bamberg County 6 No 40.5 (28.5, 56.3) 26 (1, 46) 8 falling falling trend -4.9 (-6.9, -2.8)
Kershaw County 6 No 40.4 (34.2, 47.5) 27 (5, 44) 32 falling falling trend -4.2 (-5.5, -2.9)
Sumter County 6 Yes 39.8 (34.9, 45.2) 28 (8, 43) 50 falling falling trend -3.0 (-4.2, -1.9)
Clarendon County 6 Yes 39.2 (31.1, 48.9) 29 (4, 46) 19 stable stable trend -1.6 (-4.5, 1.4)
Georgetown County 6 Yes 38.8 (33.0, 45.5) 30 (8, 45) 38 stable stable trend -0.6 (-2.6, 1.4)
Lancaster County 6 Yes 37.9 (33.0, 43.5) 31 (11, 45) 46 falling falling trend -2.6 (-4.7, -0.4)
Spartanburg County 6 Yes 36.6 (33.8, 39.6) 32 (20, 44) 129 falling falling trend -2.9 (-3.7, -2.1)
Horry County 6 Yes 36.5 (34.0, 39.2) 33 (21, 43) 172 falling falling trend -3.5 (-4.3, -2.6)
Edgefield County 6 Yes 36.4 (28.0, 46.9) 34 (4, 46) 13 falling falling trend -3.3 (-6.4, -0.2)
Oconee County 6 Yes 36.2 (31.0, 42.2) 35 (13, 46) 40 falling falling trend -2.8 (-4.5, -1.1)
Lexington County 6 Yes 35.8 (33.0, 38.9) 36 (22, 45) 119 falling falling trend -2.9 (-4.2, -1.6)
Barnwell County 6 Yes 35.4 (25.9, 47.5) 37 (4, 46) 10 falling falling trend -5.4 (-8.7, -2.0)
York County 6 Yes 35.4 (32.3, 38.7) 38 (22, 45) 101 falling falling trend -3.5 (-4.8, -2.2)
Dorchester County 6 Yes 34.8 (30.7, 39.3) 39 (20, 46) 56 falling falling trend -3.6 (-5.2, -1.9)
Aiken County 6 Yes 34.7 (31.1, 38.6) 40 (22, 46) 75 falling falling trend -2.7 (-4.8, -0.7)
Berkeley County 6 Yes 34.0 (30.5, 37.9) 41 (24, 46) 73 falling falling trend -3.0 (-4.3, -1.8)
Richland County 6 Yes 33.6 (31.1, 36.4) 42 (28, 46) 134 falling falling trend -4.1 (-5.3, -3.0)
Greenville County 6 Yes 33.3 (31.2, 35.5) 43 (31, 46) 190 falling falling trend -2.9 (-3.7, -2.1)
Allendale County 6 Yes 32.7 (18.7, 53.4) 44 (1, 46) 4 falling falling trend -5.8 (-8.4, -3.0)
Charleston County 6 Yes 32.3 (30.0, 34.8) 45 (32, 46) 148 falling falling trend -3.1 (-4.0, -2.1)
Beaufort County 6 Yes 30.5 (27.4, 34.0) 46 (34, 46) 84 falling falling trend -3.3 (-4.5, -2.0)
Notes:
Created by statecancerprofiles.cancer.gov on 12/03/2021 2:10 pm.

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 1969-2018 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.
Healthy People 2020 Objectives provided by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.


1 Source: National Program of Cancer Registries and Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results SEER*Stat Database (2001-2018) - United States Department of Health and Human Services, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and National Cancer Institute. Based on the 2020 submission.
6 Source: National Program of Cancer Registries SEER*Stat Database (2001-2018) - United States Department of Health and Human Services, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (based on the 2020 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 1969-2018 US Population Data File is used with SEER November 2020 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 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