Return to Home Incidence > Table

Incidence Rates Table

Data Options

Incidence Rate Report for Washington by County

All Cancer Sites (All Stages^), 2017-2021

All Races (includes Hispanic), Both Sexes, Ages <65

Sorted by Rate
County
 sort alphabetically by name ascending
2023 Rural-Urban Continuum Codes Φ
 sort by rural urban descending
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
Washington 5 N/A 212.5 (211.0, 214.0) N/A 16,309 falling falling trend -0.6 (-0.8, -0.5)
US (SEER+NPCR) 1 N/A 222.9 (222.7, 223.2) N/A 734,330 stable stable trend -0.3 (-1.7, 0.0)
Skagit County 7 Urban 235.3 (223.0, 248.1) 1 (1, 14) 310 stable stable trend -0.1 (-2.5, 0.3)
Kitsap County 7 Urban 234.6 (226.2, 243.1) 2 (1, 12) 669 rising rising trend 0.4 (0.1, 0.7)
Okanogan County 6 Rural 233.7 (212.6, 256.5) 3 (1, 19) 106 stable stable trend 1.1 (-0.4, 2.7)
Pierce County 7 Urban 233.6 (229.0, 238.2) 4 (1, 11) 2,120 falling falling trend -0.4 (-1.2, -0.1)
Thurston County 7 Urban 233.5 (225.5, 241.8) 5 (1, 12) 685 stable stable trend 0.0 (-0.3, 0.4)
Clallam County 7 Rural 232.2 (215.9, 249.4) 6 (1, 18) 193 stable stable trend 0.1 (-0.4, 0.6)
Wahkiakum County 6 Rural 230.9 (163.5, 319.1) 7 (1, 38) 10 stable stable trend 1.9 (-1.2, 4.7)
Grays Harbor County 7 Rural 229.6 (214.4, 245.7) 8 (1, 18) 198 stable stable trend -0.2 (-0.6, 0.2)
Snohomish County 7 Urban 227.2 (222.6, 231.9) 9 (3, 14) 1,981 falling falling trend -0.3 (-0.9, -0.1)
Chelan County 6 Urban 226.3 (210.9, 242.6) 10 (1, 19) 181 stable stable trend 0.1 (-0.8, 1.1)
Mason County 7 Rural 221.1 (204.9, 238.4) 11 (1, 23) 167 stable stable trend -0.3 (-0.8, 0.2)
Whatcom County 7 Urban 218.6 (209.5, 228.0) 12 (5, 20) 472 stable stable trend 0.5 (-1.0, 3.0)
Jefferson County 7 Rural 218.0 (193.8, 244.9) 13 (1, 30) 85 falling falling trend -0.8 (-1.4, -0.2)
Island County 7 Rural 216.7 (202.0, 232.4) 14 (2, 24) 190 stable stable trend 0.0 (-0.4, 0.5)
King County 7 Urban 213.3 (210.6, 216.1) 15 (11, 19) 4,788 stable stable trend 0.1 (-0.6, 1.2)
Douglas County 6 Urban 211.7 (191.6, 233.5) 16 (2, 30) 88 stable stable trend 0.0 (-1.2, 1.2)
Columbia County 6 Rural 207.5 (146.0, 289.1) 17 (1, 39) 9 stable stable trend 0.1 (-4.1, 4.4)
Walla Walla County 6 Urban 203.7 (186.9, 221.5) 18 (7, 32) 121 stable stable trend -0.5 (-1.6, 0.6)
Benton County 6 Urban 202.3 (193.2, 211.7) 19 (12, 28) 397 falling falling trend -0.6 (-1.1, -0.1)
Yakima County 6 Urban 199.1 (190.7, 207.7) 20 (14, 29) 450 stable stable trend -0.3 (-0.9, 0.4)
Klickitat County 6 Rural 197.1 (171.5, 225.9) 21 (3, 36) 51 stable stable trend 1.3 (-0.4, 3.1)
Cowlitz County 6 Urban 194.6 (182.8, 207.0) 22 (15, 33) 227 stable stable trend -0.7 (-1.7, 0.2)
San Juan County 7 Rural 193.1 (163.4, 227.7) 23 (2, 38) 40 stable stable trend 0.2 (-0.5, 1.0)
Franklin County 6 Urban 192.6 (179.0, 206.9) 24 (14, 34) 151 stable stable trend -0.8 (-2.1, 0.7)
Lewis County 6 Rural 189.0 (175.3, 203.5) 25 (16, 35) 163 falling falling trend -1.5 (-2.4, -0.7)
Grant County 6 Rural 188.8 (175.8, 202.5) 26 (16, 35) 167 stable stable trend -0.2 (-1.0, 0.6)
Spokane County 6 Urban 188.3 (183.0, 193.8) 27 (20, 33) 1,007 falling falling trend -1.6 (-2.1, -1.1)
Stevens County 6 Urban 187.9 (169.7, 207.6) 28 (13, 37) 97 stable stable trend -0.7 (-2.5, 1.1)
Clark County 6 Urban 182.6 (177.2, 188.1) 29 (23, 35) 915 falling falling trend -1.2 (-1.9, -0.6)
Pacific County 6 Rural 182.5 (158.1, 210.2) 30 (11, 38) 53 stable stable trend -1.4 (-3.2, 0.3)
Garfield County 6 Rural 179.8 (101.5, 296.4) 31 (1, 39) 4
*
*
Pend Oreille County 6 Rural 179.7 (146.8, 218.5) 32 (5, 39) 28 stable stable trend -1.1 (-3.2, 0.8)
Skamania County 6 Urban 175.8 (143.5, 214.0) 33 (10, 39) 25 falling falling trend -19.4 (-35.1, -2.4)
Adams County 6 Rural 170.2 (142.7, 201.4) 34 (14, 39) 29 stable stable trend 0.7 (-18.1, 13.1)
Kittitas County 6 Rural 169.8 (151.9, 189.5) 35 (21, 38) 74 stable stable trend -0.9 (-2.2, 0.5)
Lincoln County 6 Rural 164.8 (130.5, 206.1) 36 (11, 39) 20 stable stable trend -1.8 (-4.1, 0.4)
Asotin County 6 Urban 163.9 (139.4, 191.7) 37 (19, 39) 38 stable stable trend -1.9 (-4.0, 0.0)
Ferry County 6 Rural 147.9 (112.2, 193.8) 38 (15, 39) 15 falling falling trend -2.8 (-5.4, -0.4)
Whitman County 6 Rural 128.0 (110.7, 147.2) 39 (36, 39) 44 falling falling trend -3.5 (-5.6, -1.6)
Notes:
Created by statecancerprofiles.cancer.gov on 10/11/2024 11:18 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.

† 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. The Average Annual Percent Change (AAPC) is based on the APCs calculated by Joinpoint. Due to data availability issues, the time period used in the calculation of the joinpoint regression model may differ for selected counties.

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/Historic Combined Summary Stage (2004+).
⋔ 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.

Φ Rural-Urban Continuum Codes provided by the USDA.
* 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).
1 Source: National Program of Cancer Registries and Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results SEER*Stat Database - United States Department of Health and Human Services, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and National Cancer Institute. Based on the 2023 submission.
5 Source: National Program of Cancer Registries and Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results SEER*Stat Database - United States Department of Health and Human Services, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and National Cancer Institute. Based on the 2023 submission.
6 Source: National Program of Cancer Registries SEER*Stat Database - United States Department of Health and Human Services, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (based on the 2023 submission).
7 Source: SEER November 2023 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 modified by NCI. The US Population Data File is used with SEER November 2023 data.

Data for the United States does not include data from Indiana.
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