The maximum severity of flushing events subjects experienced during Week 1 of NER treatment was categorized as none, mild, moderate, severe, or very severe using the Flushing Assessment Tool via an e-diary. Flushing was assessed daily and the percentage of subjects with maximum flushing severity in each category was calculated.

Test-retest reliability of the mean flushing severity score was evaluated. The intraclass correlation coefficient comparing flushing severity scores for Week 1 and Week 2 was examined to determine test-retest reliability. Flushing severity was assessed using the FAST on a scale of 1 to 10, with 10 being the most severe.

Test-retest reliability of the maximum flushing severity score was evaluated. The intraclass correlation coefficient comparing flushing severity scores for Week 1 and Week 2 was examined to determine test-retest reliability. Flushing severity was assessed using the FAST on a scale of 1 to 10, with 10 being the most severe.

The relationship between mean flushing severity and overall flushing troublesomeness was evaluated by examining the Spearman rank-order correlation. Flushing severity was assessed using the FAST on a scale of 1 to 10, with 10 being the most severe. Overall flushing troublesomeness was assessed using the FAST on a scale of 1 to 10, with 10 being the most troublesome.

The relationship between maximum flushing severity and overall flushing troublesomeness was evaluated by examining the Spearman rank-order correlation. Flushing severity was assessed using the FAST on a scale of 1 to 10, with 10 being the most severe. Overall flushing troublesomeness was assessed using the FAST on a scale of 1 to 10, with 10 being the most troublesome.

The relationship between the change in mean flushing severity scores from Week 1 to Week 2, and the subject-rated overall treatment effect scale administered at Week 2, was assessed by examining the Spearman rank-order correlation. Flushing severity was assessed using the FAST on a scale of 1 to 10, with 10 being the most severe. The overall treatment effect was assessed on a scale of 1 (symptoms are worse since study start), 2 (symptoms are about the same since study start), or 3 (symptoms are better since study start).

The relationship between the change in maximum flushing severity scores from Week 1 to Week 2, and the subject-rated overall treatment effect scale administered at Week 2, was assessed by examining the Spearman rank-order correlation. Flushing severity was assessed using the FAST on a scale of 1 to 10, with 10 being the most severe. The overall treatment effect was assessed on a scale of 1 (symptoms are worse since study start), 2 (symptoms are about the same since study start), or 3 (symptoms are better since study start).

The change in mean flushing severity scores from study start to Day 43 was compared in subjects classified as responders vs. nonresponders. Flushing severity was assessed using the FAST on a scale of 1 to 10, with 10 being the most severe. Changes in mean flushing severity scores were negative if flushing symptoms improved and positive if flushing symptoms worsened.

The change in maximum flushing severity scores from study start to Day 43 was compared in subjects classified as responders vs. nonresponders. Flushing severity was assessed using the FAST on a scale of 1 to 10, with 10 being the most severe. Changes in maximum flushing severity scores were negative if flushing symptoms improved and positive if flushing symptoms worsened.