Interpretation of change
EOSINOPHILIC ESOPHAGITIS
The adequacy of the PGIS and PGIC as anchor measures for the EoE-IQ average score was confirmed by the correlations of change from baseline to week 24 (r = 0.55 with the change in PGIS and 0.44 with PGIC). In addition, the mean and median changes in EoE-IQ average scores across the levels of each anchor measure were as expected, with increasing negative scores (representing improvement) generally associated with greater levels of improvement on the PGIS and PGIC (Table Change from baseline in EoE-IQ average score at week 24 using PGIS and PGIC anchor measuresCI, confidence interval; EoE-IQ, Eosinophilic Esophagitis Impact Questionnaire; PGIC, Patient Global Impression of Change; PGIS, Patient Global Impression of Severity; SD, standard deviationAs expected, the distribution-based estimates were lower than the anchor-based estimates; the half-SD of the baseline score was 0.39, and the SEM using reliability based on PGIS was 0.39. Taken together, the anchor-based and distribution-based estimates, especially the median value corresponding to a 1-point improvement on the PGIS, indicated that a minimum 0.6-point reduction in the EoE-IQ average score could be considered a clinically meaningful within-patient change.