Quantitative MRCP and metrics of bile duct disease over time in patients with primary sclerosing cholangitis: A prospective study.

BACKGROUND: Imaging markers of biliary disease in primary sclerosing cholangitis (PSC) have potential for use in clinical and trial disease monitoring. Herein, we evaluate how quantitative magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography (MRCP) metrics change over time, as per the natural history of disease. METHODS: Individuals with PSC were prospectively scanned using non-contrast MRCP. Quantitative metrics were calculated using MRCP+ post-processing software to assess duct diameters and dilated and strictured regions. Additionally, a hepatopancreatobiliary radiologist (blinded to clinical details, biochemistry and quantitative biliary metrics) reported each scan, including ductal disease assessment according to the modified Amsterdam Cholangiographic Score (MAS). RESULTS: At baseline, 14 quantitative MRCP+ metrics were found to be significantly different in patients with PSC (N = 55) compared to those with primary biliary cholangitis (N = 55), autoimmune hepatitis (N = 57) and healthy controls (N = 18). In PSC specifically, baseline metrics quantifying the number of strictures and the number and length of bile ducts correlated with the MAS, transient elastography and serum ALP values (p < 0.01 for all correlations). Over a median 371-day follow-up (range: 364-462), 29 patients with PSC underwent repeat MRCP, of whom 15 exhibited quantitative changes in MRCP+ metrics. Compared to baseline, quantitative MRCP+ identified an increasing number of strictures over time (p < 0.05). Comparatively, no significant differences in biochemistry, elastography or the MAS were observed between timepoints. Quantitative MRCP+ metrics remained stable in non-PSC liver disease. CONCLUSION: Quantitative MRCP+ identifies changes in ductal disease over time in PSC, despite stability in biochemistry, liver stiffness and radiologist-derived cholangiographic assessment (trial registration: ISRCTN39463479).

Primary biliary cholangitis drug evaluation and regulatory approval: Where do we go from here?

Primary biliary cholangitis (PBC) is a chronic cholestatic liver disease. The management landscape was transformed 20 years ago with the advent of Ursodeoxycholic Acid (UDCA). Up to 40% of patients do not, however, respond adequately to UDCA and therefore still remain at risk of disease progression to cirrhosis. The introduction of Obeticholic acid (OCA) as second-line therapy for patients failing UDCA has improved outcomes for PBC patients. There remains, however, a need for better treatments for higher risk patients. The greatest threat facing our efforts to improve treatment in PBC is, paradoxically, the regulatory approval model providing conditional marketing authorisation for new drugs based on biochemical markers on the condition that long-term, randomized placebo-controlled outcomes trials are performed to confirm efficacy. As demonstrated by the COBALT confirmatory study with OCA, it is difficult to retain patients in the required follow-on confirmatory placebo-controlled PBC outcomes trials when a licensed drug is commercially available. New PBC therapies in development such as the PPAR agonists, face even greater challenges in demonstrating outcomes benefit through randomized placebo-controlled studies once following conditional marketing authorisation, as there will be even more treatment options available. A recently published EMA Reflection Paper provides some guidance on the regulatory pathway to full approval but fails to recognise the importance of Real-World Data in providing evidence of outcomes benefit in rare diseases. Here we explore the impact of the EMA reflection paper on PBC therapy and offer pragmatic solutions for generating evidence of long-term outcomes through Real World data collection.

Immunopathogenesis of Primary Biliary Cholangitis, Primary Sclerosing Cholangitis and Autoimmune Hepatitis: Themes and Concepts.

Autoimmune liver diseases include primary biliary cholangitis, primary sclerosing cholangitis, and autoimmune hepatitis, a family of chronic immune-mediated disorders that target hepatocytes and cholangiocytes. Treatments remain nonspecific, variably effective, and noncurative, and the need for liver transplantation is disproportionate to their rarity. Development of effective therapies requires better knowledge of pathogenic mechanisms, including the roles of genetic risk, and how the environment and gut dysbiosis cause immune cell dysfunction and aberrant bile acid signaling. This review summarizes key etiologic and pathogenic concepts and themes relevant for clinical practice and how such learning can guide the development of new therapies for people living with autoimmune liver diseases.

Opinion paper on the diagnosis and treatment of progressive familial intrahepatic cholestasis.

Background & Aims: Progressive familial intrahepatic cholestasis (PFIC) relates to a group of rare, debilitating, liver disorders which typically present in early childhood, but have also been reported in adults. Without early detection and effective treatment, PFIC can result in end-stage liver disease. The aim of the paper was to put forward recommendations that promote standardisation of the management of PFIC in clinical practice. Methods: A committee of six specialists came together to discuss the challenges faced by physicians in the management of PFIC. The committee agreed on two key areas where expert guidance is required to optimise care: (1) how to diagnose and treat patients with a clinical presentation of PFIC in the absence of clear genetic test results/whilst awaiting results, and (2) how to monitor disease progression and response to treatment. A systematic literature review was undertaken to contextualise and inform the recommendations. Results: An algorithm was developed for the diagnosis and treatment of children with suspected PFIC. The algorithm recommends the use of licensed inhibitors of ileal bile acid transporters as the first-line treatment for patients with PFIC and suggests that genetic testing be used to confirm genotype whilst treatment is initiated in patients in whom PFIC is suspected. The authors recommend referring patients to an experienced centre, and ensuring that monitoring includes measurements of pruritus, serum bile acid levels, growth, and quality of life following diagnosis and during treatment. Conclusions: The algorithm presented within this paper offers guidance to optimise the management of paediatric PFIC. The authors hope that these recommendations will help to standardise the management of PFIC in the absence of clear clinical guidelines. Impact and implications: This opinion paper outlines a consistent approach to the contemporaneous diagnosis, monitoring, referral and management of children with progressive familial intrahepatic cholestasis. This should assist physicians given the recent developments in genetic diagnosis and the availability of effective drug therapy. This manuscript will also help to raise awareness of current developments and educate health planners on the place for new drug therapies in progressive familial intrahepatic cholestasis.

Adequate versus deep response to ursodeoxycholic acid in primary biliary cholangitis: To what extent and under what conditions is normal alkaline phosphatase level associated with complication-free survival gain?

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Normal alkaline phosphatase (ALP) levels in ursodeoxycholic acid (UDCA)-treated patients with primary biliary cholangitis (PBC) are associated with better long-term outcome. However, second-line therapies are currently recommended only when ALP levels remain above 1.5 times the upper limit of normal (×ULN) after 12-month UDCA. We assessed whether, in patients considered good responders to UDCA, normal ALP levels were associated with significant survival gains. APPROACH AND RESULTS: We performed a retrospective cohort study of 1047 patients with PBC who attained an adequate response to UDCA according to Paris-2 criteria. Time to liver-related complications, liver transplantation, or death was assessed using adjusted restricted mean survival time (RMST) analysis. The overall incidence rate of events was 17.0 (95% CI: 13.7-21.1) per 1000 out of 4763.2 patient-years. On the whole population, normal serum ALP values (but not normal gamma-glutamyl transpeptidase (GGT), alanine aminotransferase (ALT), or aspartate aminotransferase (AST); or total bilirubin < 0.6 ×ULN) were associated with a significant absolute complication-free survival gain at 10 years (mean 7.6 months, 95% CI: 2.7 - 12.6 mo.; p = 0.003). In subgroup analysis, this association was significant in patients with a liver stiffness measurement ≥ 10 kPa and/or age ≤ 62 years, with a 10-year absolute complication-free survival gain of 52.8 months (95% CI: 45.7-59.9, p < 0.001) when these 2 conditions were met. CONCLUSIONS: PBC patients with an adequate response to UDCA and persistent ALP elevation between 1.1 and 1.5 ×ULN, particularly those with advanced fibrosis and/or who are sufficiently young, remain at risk of poor outcome. Further therapeutic efforts should be considered for these patients.

Open-label, clinical trial extension: Two-year safety and efficacy results of seladelpar in patients with primary biliary cholangitis.

BACKGROUND: Seladelpar is a potent and selective peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor-δ agonist that targets multiple cell types involved in primary biliary cholangitis (PBC), leading to anti-cholestatic, anti-inflammatory and anti-pruritic effects. AIMS: To evaluate the long-term safety and efficacy of seladelpar in patients with PBC. METHODS: In an open-label, international, long-term extension study, patients with PBC completing seladelpar lead-in studies continued treatment. Seladelpar was taken orally once daily at doses of 5 or 10 mg with dose adjustment permitted for safety or tolerability. The primary analysis was for safety and the secondary efficacy analysis examined biochemical markers of cholestasis and liver injury. The study was terminated early due to the unexpected histological findings in a concurrent study for non-alcoholic steatohepatitis, which were subsequently found to predate treatment. Safety and efficacy data were analysed through 2 years. RESULTS: There were no serious treatment-related adverse events observed among 106 patients treated with seladelpar for up to 2 years. There were four discontinuations for safety, one possibly related to seladelpar. Among 53 patients who completed 2 years of seladelpar, response rates increased from years 1 to 2 for the composite endpoint (alkaline phosphatase [ALP] <1.67 × ULN, ≥15% decrease in ALP, and total bilirubin ≤ULN) and ALP normalisation from 66% to 79% and from 26% to 42%, respectively. In those with elevated bilirubin at baseline, 43% achieved normalisation at year 2. CONCLUSIONS: Seladelpar was safe, and markedly improved biochemical markers of cholestasis and liver injury in patients with PBC. These effects were maintained or improved throughout the second year. CLINICALTRIALS: gov: NCT03301506; Clinicaltrialsregister.eu: 2017-003910-16.

Immune responses and clinical outcomes after COVID-19 vaccination in patients with liver disease and liver transplant recipients.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Comparative assessments of immunogenicity following different COVID-19 vaccines in patients with distinct liver diseases are lacking. SARS-CoV-2-specific T-cell and antibody responses were evaluated longitudinally after one to three vaccine doses, with long-term follow-up for COVID-19-related clinical outcomes. METHODS: A total of 849 participants (355 with cirrhosis, 74 with autoimmune hepatitis [AIH], 36 with vascular liver disease [VLD], 257 liver transplant recipients [LTRs] and 127 healthy controls [HCs]) were recruited from four countries. Standardised immune assays were performed pre and post three vaccine doses (V1-3). RESULTS: In the total cohort, there were incremental increases in antibody titres after each vaccine dose (p <0.0001). Factors associated with reduced antibody responses were age and LT, whereas heterologous vaccination, prior COVID-19 and mRNA platforms were associated with greater responses. Although antibody titres decreased between post-V2 and pre-V3 (p = 0.012), patients with AIH, VLD, and cirrhosis had equivalent antibody responses to HCs post-V3. LTRs had lower and more heterogenous antibody titres than other groups, including post-V3 where 9% had no detectable antibodies; this was heavily influenced by intensity of immunosuppression. Vaccination increased T-cell IFNγ responses in all groups except LTRs. Patients with liver disease had lower functional antibody responses against nine Omicron subvariants and reduced T-cell responses to Omicron BA.1-specific peptides compared to wild-type. 122 cases of breakthrough COVID-19 were reported of which 5/122 (4%) were severe. Of the severe cases, 4/5 (80%) occurred in LTRs and 2/5 (40%) had no serological response post-V2. CONCLUSION: After three COVID-19 vaccines, patients with liver disease generally develop robust antibody and T-cell responses to vaccination and have mild COVID-19. However, LTRs have sustained no/low antibody titres and appear most vulnerable to severe disease. IMPACT AND IMPLICATIONS: Standardised assessments of the immune response to different COVID-19 vaccines in patients with liver disease are lacking. We performed antibody and T-cell assays at multiple timepoints following up to three vaccine doses in a large cohort of patients with a range of liver conditions. Overall, the three most widely available vaccine platforms were immunogenic and appeared to protect against severe breakthrough COVID-19. This will provide reassurance to patients with chronic liver disease who were deemed at high risk of severe COVID-19 during the pre-vaccination era, however, liver transplant recipients had the lowest antibody titres and remained vulnerable to severe breakthrough infection. We also characterise the immune response to multiple SARS-CoV-2 variants and describe the interaction between disease type, severity, and vaccine platform. These insights may prove useful in the event of future viral infections which also require rapid vaccine development and delivery to patients with liver disease.

Critical shortfalls in the management of PBC: Results of a UK-wide, population-based evaluation of care delivery.

Background & Aims: Guidelines for the management of primary biliary cholangitis (PBC) were published by the British Society of Gastroenterology in 2018. In this study, we assessed adherence to these guidelines in the UK National Health Service (NHS). Methods: All NHS acute trusts were invited to contribute data between 1 January 2021 and 31 March 2022, assessing clinical care delivered to patients with PBC in the UK. Results: We obtained data for 8,968 patients with PBC and identified substantial gaps in care across all guideline domains. Ursodeoxycholic acid (UDCA) was used as first-line treatment in 88% of patients (n = 7,864) but was under-dosed in one-third (n = 1,964). Twenty percent of patients who were UDCA-untreated (202/998) and 50% of patients with inadequate UDCA response (1,074/2,102) received second-line treatment. More than one-third of patients were not assessed for fatigue (43%; n = 3,885) or pruritus (38%; n = 3,415) in the previous 2 years. Fifty percent of all patients with evidence of hepatic decompensation were discussed with a liver transplant centre (222/443). Appropriate use of second-line treatment and referral for liver transplantation was significantly better in specialist PBC treatment centres compared with non-specialist centres (p <0.001). Conclusions: Poor adherence to guidelines exists across all domains of PBC care in the NHS. Although specialist PBC treatment centres had greater adherence to guidelines, no single centre met all quality standards. Nationwide improvement in the delivery of PBC-related healthcare is required. Impact and implications: This population-based evaluation of primary biliary cholangitis, spanning four nations of the UK, highlights critical shortfalls in care delivery when measured across all guideline domains. These include the use of liver biopsy in diagnosis; referral practice for second-line treatment and/or liver transplant assessment; and the evaluation of symptoms, extrahepatic manifestations, and complications of cirrhosis. The authors therefore propose implementation of a dedicated primary biliary cholangitis care bundle that aims to minimise heterogeneity in clinical practice and maximise adherence to key guideline standards.

CCL24 regulates biliary inflammation and fibrosis in primary sclerosing cholangitis.

ˆCCL24 is a pro-fibrotic, pro-inflammatory chemokine expressed in several chronic fibrotic diseases. In the liver, CCL24 plays a role in fibrosis and inflammation, and blocking CCL24 led to reduced liver injury in experimental models. We studied the role of CCL24 in primary sclerosing cholangitis (PSC) and evaluated the potential therapeutic effect of blocking CCL24 in this disease. Multidrug resistance gene 2-knockout (Mdr2-/-) mice demonstrated CCL24 expression in liver macrophages and were used as a relevant experimental PSC model. CCL24-neutralizing monoclonal antibody, CM-101, significantly improved inflammation, fibrosis, and cholestasis-related markers in the biliary area. Moreover, using spatial transcriptomics, we observed reduced proliferation and senescence of cholangiocytes following CCL24 neutralization. Next, we demonstrated that CCL24 expression was elevated under pro-fibrotic conditions in primary human cholangiocytes and macrophages, and it induced proliferation of primary human hepatic stellate cells and cholangiocytes, which was attenuated following CCL24 inhibition. Correspondingly, CCL24 was found to be highly expressed in liver biopsies of patients with PSC. CCL24 serum levels correlated with Enhanced Liver Fibrosis score, most notably in patients with high alkaline phosphatase levels. These results suggest that blocking CCL24 may have a therapeutic effect in patients with PSC by reducing liver inflammation, fibrosis, and cholestasis.

Role of microbiome in autoimmune liver diseases.

The microbiome plays a crucial role in integrating environmental influences into host physiology, potentially linking it to autoimmune liver diseases, such as autoimmune hepatitis, primary biliary cholangitis, and primary sclerosing cholangitis. All autoimmune liver diseases are associated with reduced diversity of the gut microbiome and altered abundance of certain bacteria. However, the relationship between the microbiome and liver diseases is bidirectional and varies over the course of the disease. This makes it challenging to dissect whether such changes in the microbiome are initiating or driving factors in autoimmune liver diseases, secondary consequences of disease and/or pharmacological intervention, or alterations that modify the clinical course that patients experience. Potential mechanisms include the presence of pathobionts, disease-modifying microbial metabolites, and more nonspecific reduced gut barrier function, and it is highly likely that the effect of these change during the progression of the disease. Recurrent disease after liver transplantation is a major clinical challenge and a common denominator in these conditions, which could also represent a window to disease mechanisms of the gut-liver axis. Herein, we propose future research priorities, which should involve clinical trials, extensive molecular phenotyping at high resolution, and experimental studies in model systems. Overall, autoimmune liver diseases are characterized by an altered microbiome, and interventions targeting these changes hold promise for improving clinical care based on the emerging field of microbiota medicine.

Seladelpar efficacy and safety at 3 months in patients with primary biliary cholangitis: ENHANCE, a phase 3, randomized, placebo-controlled study.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: ENHANCE was a phase 3 study that evaluated efficacy and safety of seladelpar, a selective peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor-δ (PPAR) agonist, versus placebo in patients with primary biliary cholangitis with inadequate response or intolerance to ursodeoxycholic acid (UDCA). APPROACH AND RESULTS: Patients were randomized 1:1:1 to oral seladelpar 5 mg (n=89), 10 mg (n=89), placebo (n=87) daily (with UDCA, as appropriate). Primary end point was a composite biochemical response [alkaline phosphatase (ALP) < 1.67×upper limit of normal (ULN), ≥15% ALP decrease from baseline, and total bilirubin ≤ ULN] at month 12. Key secondary end points were ALP normalization at month 12 and change in pruritus numerical rating scale (NRS) at month 6 in patients with baseline score ≥4. Aminotransferases were assessed. ENHANCE was terminated early following an erroneous safety signal in a concurrent, NASH trial. While blinded, primary and secondary efficacy end points were amended to month 3. Significantly more patients receiving seladelpar met the primary end point (seladelpar 5 mg: 57.1%, 10 mg: 78.2%) versus placebo (12.5%) ( p < 0.0001). ALP normalization occurred in 5.4% ( p =0.08) and 27.3% ( p < 0.0001) of patients receiving 5 and 10 mg seladelpar, respectively, versus 0% receiving placebo. Seladelpar 10 mg significantly reduced mean pruritus NRS versus placebo [10 mg: -3.14 ( p =0.02); placebo: -1.55]. Alanine aminotransferase decreased significantly with seladelpar versus placebo [5 mg: 23.4% ( p =0.0008); 10 mg: 16.7% ( p =0.03); placebo: 4%]. There were no serious treatment-related adverse events. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with primary biliary cholangitis (PBC) with inadequate response or intolerance to UDCA who were treated with seladelpar 10 mg had significant improvements in liver biochemistry and pruritus. Seladelpar appeared safe and well tolerated.

Optimizing therapy in primary biliary cholangitis: Alkaline phosphatase at six months identifies one-year non-responders and predicts survival.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Patients with primary biliary cholangitis (PBC) and insufficient response to ursodeoxycholic acid (UDCA), currently assessed after 1 year, are candidates for second-line therapy. The aims of this study are to assess biochemical response pattern and determine the utility of alkaline phosphatase (ALP) at six months as a predictor of insufficient response. METHODS: UDCA-treated patients in the GLOBAL PBC database with available liver biochemistries at one year were included. POISE criteria were used to assess response to treatment, defined as ALP <1.67 × upper limit of normal (ULN) and normal total bilirubin at one year. Various thresholds of ALP at six months were evaluated to predict insufficient response based on negative predictive value (NPV) and that with nearest to 90% NPV was selected. RESULTS: For the study, 1362 patients were included, 1232 (90.5%) female, mean age of 54 years. The POISE criteria were met by 56.4% (n = 768) of patients at one year. The median ALP (IQR) of those who met POISE criteria compared to those who did not was 1.05 × ULN (0.82-1.33) vs. 2.37 × ULN (1.72-3.69) at six months (p < .001). Of 235 patients with serum ALP >1.9 × ULN at six months, 89% did not achieve POISE criteria (NPV) after one year of UDCA. Of those with insufficient response by POISE criteria at one year, 210 (67%) had an ALP >1.9 × ULN at six months and thus would have been identified early. CONCLUSIONS: We can identify patients for second-line therapy at six months using an ALP threshold of 1.9 × ULN, given that approximately 90% of these patients are non-responders according to POISE criteria.

Nomenclature, diagnosis and management of drug-induced autoimmune-like hepatitis (DI-ALH): An expert opinion meeting report.

Drug-induced liver injury (DILI) can mimic almost all other liver disorders. A phenotype increasingly ascribed to drugs is autoimmune-like hepatitis (ALH). This article summarises the major topics discussed at a joint International Conference held between the Drug-Induced Liver Injury consortium and the International Autoimmune Hepatitis Group. DI-ALH is a liver injury with laboratory and/or histological features that may be indistinguishable from those of autoimmune hepatitis (AIH). Previous studies have revealed that patients with DI-ALH and those with idiopathic AIH have very similar clinical, biochemical, immunological and histological features. Differentiating DI-ALH from AIH is important as patients with DI-ALH rarely require long-term immunosuppression and the condition often resolves spontaneously after withdrawal of the implicated drug, whereas patients with AIH mostly require long-term immunosuppression. Therefore, revision of the diagnosis on long-term follow-up may be necessary in some cases. More than 40 different drugs including nitrofurantoin, methyldopa, hydralazine, minocycline, infliximab, herbal and dietary supplements (such as Khat and Tinospora cordifolia) have been implicated in DI-ALH. Understanding of DI-ALH is limited by the lack of specific markers of the disease that could allow for a precise diagnosis, while there is similarly no single feature which is diagnostic of AIH. We propose a management algorithm for patients with liver injury and an autoimmune phenotype. There is an urgent need to prospectively evaluate patients with DI-ALH systematically to enable definitive characterisation of this condition.

PRIMIS: design of a pivotal, randomized, phase 3 study evaluating the safety and efficacy of the nonsteroidal farnesoid X receptor agonist cilofexor in noncirrhotic patients with primary sclerosing cholangitis.

BACKGROUND: Primary sclerosing cholangitis (PSC) is a chronic progressive liver disease leading to biliary fibrosis and cirrhosis. Cilofexor is a nonsteroidal farnesoid X receptor agonist that demonstrated significant improvements in liver biochemistry and markers of cholestasis in patients with PSC in a phase 2 study. We describe here the rationale, design, and implementation of the phase 3 PRIMIS trial, the largest placebo-controlled trial in PSC. METHODS: Adults with large-duct PSC without cirrhosis are randomized 2:1 to receive oral cilofexor 100 mg once daily or placebo for up to 96 weeks during the blinded phase. Patients completing the blinded phase are eligible to receive open-label cilofexor 100 mg daily for up to 96 weeks. The primary objective is to evaluate whether cilofexor reduces the risk of fibrosis progression compared with placebo. Liver biopsy is performed at screening and Week 96 of the blinded phase for histologic assessment of fibrosis. The primary endpoint-chosen in conjunction with guidance from the U.S. Food and Drug Administration-is the proportion of patients with ≥ 1-stage increase in fibrosis according to Ludwig histologic classification at week 96. Secondary objectives include evaluation of changes in liver biochemistry, serum bile acids, liver fibrosis assessed by noninvasive methods, health-related quality of life, and safety of cilofexor. CONCLUSION: The phase 3 PRIMIS study is the largest randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial in PSC to date and will allow for robust evaluation of the efficacy and safety of cilofexor in noncirrhotic patients with large-duct PSC. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03890120; registered 26/03/2019.

Primary sclerosing cholangitis and overlap features of autoimmune hepatitis: A coming of age or an age-ist problem?

Autoimmune liver diseases are siloed into three syndromes that define clinical practice. These classifiers can, and are, challenged by variant presentations across all ages, something inevitable to disease definitions that rely on interpreting (inherently variable) semi-quantitative/qualitative clinical, laboratory, pathological or radiological findings. Furthermore this categorisation is premised on an ongoing absence of definable disease aetiologies. Clinicians thus encounter individuals with biochemical, serological, and histological manifestations that are common to both primary sclerosing cholangitis (PSC) and autoimmune hepatitis (AIH), often labelled as 'PSC/AIH-overlap'. In childhood the term 'autoimmune sclerosing cholangitis (ASC)' may be used, and some propose this to be a distinct disease process. In this article we champion the concept that ASC and PSC/AIH-overlap are not distinct entities. Rather, they represent inflammatory phases of PSC frequently manifesting earlier in the disease course, most notably in younger patients. Ultimately, disease outcomes remain similar to those of a more classical PSC phenotype observed in later life. Thus, we argue that it is now time to align disease names and descriptions used by clinicians across all patient subpopulations, to help unify care. This will enhance collaborative studies and ultimately contribute to rational treatment advances.