Return to Home Incidence > Table

Incidence Rates Table

Data Options

Incidence Rate Report for South Carolina by County

Kidney & Renal Pelvis (All Stages^), 2015-2019

All Races (includes Hispanic), Both Sexes, 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
South Carolina 6 17.9 (17.4, 18.4) N/A 1,130 rising rising trend 1.5 (0.9, 2.0)
US (SEER+NPCR) 1 17.3 (17.3, 17.4) N/A 66,203 stable stable trend 0.1 (-0.4, 0.7)
York County 6 16.9 (14.9, 19.2) 34 (13, 40) 51 stable stable trend 0.8 (-0.8, 2.5)
Williamsburg County 6 17.8 (12.2, 25.1) 27 (1, 43) 8 stable stable trend 0.4 (-4.3, 5.2)
Union County 6 25.2 (18.2, 34.1) 2 (1, 36) 10 stable stable trend 1.5 (-1.8, 5.0)
Sumter County 6 17.5 (14.4, 21.2) 29 (5, 41) 23 rising rising trend 2.9 (1.0, 4.9)
Spartanburg County 6 20.4 (18.4, 22.7) 11 (4, 28) 77 rising rising trend 2.2 (0.3, 4.1)
Saluda County 6 18.1 (11.5, 27.4) 24 (1, 44) 5 stable stable trend -2.7 (-6.9, 1.8)
Richland County 6 18.7 (16.8, 20.7) 18 (7, 35) 77 rising rising trend 1.7 (0.2, 3.3)
Pickens County 6 19.7 (16.4, 23.4) 14 (2, 38) 28 stable stable trend 1.1 (-1.2, 3.4)
Orangeburg County 6 19.2 (15.7, 23.4) 15 (3, 39) 22 rising rising trend 2.7 (0.3, 5.1)
Oconee County 6 21.2 (17.2, 26.0) 9 (1, 37) 23 stable stable trend 2.1 (-0.6, 4.8)
Newberry County 6 22.0 (16.4, 29.0) 6 (1, 39) 11 stable stable trend 1.3 (-1.4, 4.0)
McCormick County 6 17.8 (10.2, 32.3) 26 (1, 44) 4 stable stable trend 0.3 (-3.1, 3.7)
Marlboro County 6 17.8 (11.9, 25.8) 25 (1, 44) 6 stable stable trend 3.4 (-1.0, 8.1)
Marion County 6 21.5 (15.7, 28.9) 8 (1, 40) 10 rising rising trend 5.6 (1.7, 9.8)
Lexington County 6 18.5 (16.5, 20.7) 21 (8, 37) 65 stable stable trend 0.8 (-1.1, 2.7)
Lee County 6 18.4 (10.3, 30.3) 22 (1, 44) 3
*
*
Laurens County 6 23.6 (19.0, 29.0) 3 (1, 32) 20 rising rising trend 4.6 (2.6, 6.6)
Lancaster County 6 16.5 (13.4, 20.2) 36 (9, 42) 21 stable stable trend 0.7 (-1.9, 3.4)
Kershaw County 6 22.3 (17.8, 27.7) 4 (1, 35) 19 rising rising trend 4.2 (1.5, 7.0)
Jasper County 6 9.4 (5.6, 15.2) 44 (32, 44) 4
*
*
Horry County 6 17.1 (15.5, 18.9) 32 (14, 38) 90 stable stable trend 1.5 (-0.2, 3.2)
Hampton County 6 13.4 (7.6, 22.2) 41 (4, 44) 3
*
*
Greenwood County 6 20.3 (16.3, 25.1) 12 (2, 39) 19 rising rising trend 4.4 (1.8, 7.1)
Greenville County 6 17.2 (15.7, 18.8) 31 (15, 38) 103 rising rising trend 1.6 (0.7, 2.5)
Georgetown County 6 21.9 (17.6, 27.1) 7 (1, 37) 22 rising rising trend 3.9 (1.8, 6.0)
Florence County 6 18.3 (15.4, 21.5) 23 (5, 40) 31 stable stable trend 1.5 (-0.8, 3.9)
Fairfield County 6 11.3 (6.6, 18.5) 42 (13, 44) 4
*
*
Edgefield County 6 17.3 (11.8, 24.9) 30 (1, 44) 7 rising rising trend 4.4 (2.0, 6.9)
Dorchester County 6 16.8 (14.1, 19.8) 35 (9, 41) 30 stable stable trend -0.5 (-2.8, 1.9)
Dillon County 6 18.5 (12.7, 26.1) 20 (1, 43) 7 stable stable trend 0.0 (-3.7, 3.8)
Darlington County 6 19.1 (15.1, 23.9) 17 (2, 40) 17 stable stable trend 0.5 (-2.1, 3.1)
Colleton County 6 29.1 (22.2, 37.7) 1 (1, 21) 14 rising rising trend 3.8 (0.6, 7.1)
Clarendon County 6 22.1 (16.0, 29.8) 5 (1, 40) 10 rising rising trend 4.3 (0.1, 8.7)
Chesterfield County 6 15.5 (11.3, 21.0) 38 (5, 44) 10 stable stable trend -0.4 (-3.7, 2.9)
Chester County 6 20.9 (15.2, 28.3) 10 (1, 41) 9 stable stable trend 1.8 (-2.0, 5.7)
Cherokee County 6 15.6 (11.6, 20.6) 37 (6, 43) 11 stable stable trend -1.3 (-4.0, 1.5)
Charleston County 6 17.0 (15.3, 18.7) 33 (14, 39) 83 stable stable trend 0.2 (-0.8, 1.2)
Berkeley County 6 20.2 (17.7, 23.0) 13 (3, 33) 49 stable stable trend 1.1 (-0.3, 2.6)
Beaufort County 6 9.9 (8.3, 11.8) 43 (39, 44) 31 stable stable trend -0.6 (-2.4, 1.1)
Barnwell County 6 14.6 (8.5, 23.5) 39 (2, 44) 4 stable stable trend -3.2 (-7.0, 0.8)
Bamberg County 6 19.2 (11.1, 31.3) 16 (1, 44) 4 stable stable trend 0.2 (-4.3, 4.9)
Anderson County 6 18.6 (16.1, 21.3) 19 (6, 38) 45 stable stable trend 1.0 (-0.7, 2.8)
Aiken County 6 14.1 (11.9, 16.6) 40 (24, 43) 31 stable stable trend 1.8 (-1.1, 4.7)
Abbeville County 6 17.6 (11.6, 25.9) 28 (1, 44) 6 stable stable trend 1.3 (-3.4, 6.2)
Allendale County 6
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Calhoun County 6
*
*
3 or fewer
*
*
Notes:
Created by statecancerprofiles.cancer.gov on 12/02/2022 5:28 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.
Allendale, Calhoun

† 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.
* 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.

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