INTRODUCTION:The optimal instrument for assessing histologic disease activity in patients with eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) is unclear. We assessed the responsiveness of the EoE Histologic Scoring System (EoE-HSS) when compared with that of the peak eosinophil count (PEC).METHODS:Histopathology slides were obtained from patients with EoE at baseline and after 8 weeks of treatment with swallowed topical budesonide or elimination diet. Two blinded gastrointestinal pathologists scored biopsies on the EoE-HSS, PEC, and 100-mm visual analog scale (VAS) of overall histologic severity. Change was defined as an improvement by ≥0.5 SD in baseline VAS. Responsiveness was quantified using the standardized effect size (SES) and the probability that the index distinguishes a patient with improvement from a patient without improvement, which is the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC). Longitudinal validity was assessed using Pearson correlations between changes in EoE-HSS and both PEC and VAS.RESULTS:The EoE-HSS grade (SES 2.18 [95% confidence interval, CI: 1.46-2.88]; AUC 0.73 [95% CI: 0.57-0.84]) and stage (SES 2.07 [95% CI: 1.37-2.77]; AUC 0.73 [95% CI: 0.58-0.84]) were highly responsive, similar to PEC (SES 1.44 [95% CI: 0.80-2.07]; AUC 0.73 [95% CI: 0.58-0.84]). The EoE-HSS grade and stage were more highly correlated with changes in VAS (grade 0.92 [95% CI: 0.86-0.95]; stage 0.89 [95% CI: 0.81-0.94]) than with changes in PEC (grade 0.74 [95% CI: 0.58-0.85]; stage 0.66 [95% CI: 0.47-0.80]).DISCUSSION:The EoE-HSS is highly responsive, performs similarly to PEC, and is better correlated with changes in overall histologic activity in patients with EoE.
ASJC Scopus subject areas