Abstract

Patients with hard-to-treat autoimmune hepatitis (AIH) or primary biliary cholangitis (PBC) are defined a posteriori as those who do not show a sufficient response or are intolerant to pharmacological treatments, thus not achieving biochemical surrogate endpoints that are associated with long-term liver-related-event-free survival. The absence of a recently harmonized definition of 'complete biochemical response within 6 months (CBR≤6M)', which is defined as the normalization of serum transaminase and IgG levels below the upper limit of normal (ULN) at ≤6 months after treatment initiation is regarded as hard-to-treat AIH. The implementation of CBR≤6M, in turn, has been facilitating clinical trials, e.g., between azathioprine and mycophenolate mofetil, to reconsider appropriate first-line steroid sparing agents, leading to a reduction in the number of hard-to-treat AIH cases. Regarding PBC, one of the disseminated definitions of hard-to-treat patients is the absence of POISE criteria, which are evaluated at 12 months with serum alkaline phosphatase and bilirubin levels, after the introduction of ursodeoxycholic acid. Hard-to-treat PBC not meeting the POISE criteria has very recently been the target population for the U.S. FDA-approved second-line drugs, elafibranor and seladelpar. In future pharmacological treatment of AIH and PBC, the primary objective for AIH is likely to focus on lowering the number of hard-to-treat patients with personalized steroid sparing treatment regimens. A challenging goal in PBC treatment is the further optimization of treatment surrogate endpoints, even to the stricter ALP normalization, with which an indication of second- or later-line drugs might be expanded, but could ultimately lengthen patients' long-term survival.