Drug can cause almost all known types of acute, subacute, and chronic liver injuries. Drug-induced liver injury (DILI) is an important cause of unexplained liver injury in clinical practice. Correct diagnosis of DILI is challenging due to lack of specific diagnostic biomarkers, especially in patients with pre-existing liver disease and multiple concomitant drugs. A comprehensive understanding of the risk factors, clinical features, and prognosis of liver injury caused by different drugs will help physicians to recognize, diagnose, and manage it timely. Although the guideline was developed based on evidence-based medicine provided by the latest studies, there is limited high-quality evidence in the field of DILI. Therefore, this guideline should be interpreted with caution, and physicians should adopt an optimal diagnostic and therapeutic strategy for individual patients within the framework of the guideline.
药物可导致急性、慢性和特殊表型等目前已知的几乎所有类型的肝损伤。药物性肝损伤是临床上不明原因肝损伤的重要病因。由于缺乏特异性的诊断生物标志物，其在实践中的正确诊断充满挑战，尤其是在伴随基础肝病、多药联合治疗等复杂临床场景中。对不同药物导致肝损伤的风险因素、临床特征和预后的全面了解，有助于临床医生及时识别、诊断和管理。尽管指南根据最新研究进展提供的循证医学证据制定，但应该意识到，在药物性肝损伤领域高质量证据有限，因此，对指南的解读应谨慎，临床医生应在指南框架下对个体患者采取最佳的诊疗策略。.

OBJECTIVE: Idiosyncratic drug-induced liver injury (DILI) is a complex and unpredictable event caused by drugs, and herbal or dietary supplements. Early identification of human hepatotoxicity at preclinical stages remains a major challenge, in which the selection of validated in vitro systems and test drugs has a significant impact. In this systematic review, we analyzed the compounds used in hepatotoxicity assays and established a list of DILI-positive and -negative control drugs for validation of in vitro models of DILI, supported by literature and clinical evidence and endorsed by an expert committee from the COST Action ProEuroDILI Network (CA17112).
METHODS: Following 2020 PRISMA guidelines, original research articles focusing on DILI which used in vitro human models and performed at least one hepatotoxicity assay with positive and negative control compounds, were included. Bias of the studies was assessed by a modified \'Toxicological Data Reliability Assessment Tool\'.
RESULTS: A total of 51 studies (out of 2,936) met the inclusion criteria, with 30 categorized as reliable without restrictions. Although there was a broad consensus on positive compounds, the selection of negative compounds lacked clarity. 2D monoculture, short exposure times and cytotoxicity endpoints were the most tested, although there was no consensus on drug concentrations.
CONCLUSIONS: Extensive analysis highlighted the lack of agreement on control compounds for in vitro DILI assessment. Following comprehensive in vitro and clinical data analysis together with input from the expert committee, an evidence-based consensus-driven list of 10 positive and negative control drugs for validation of in vitro models of DILI is proposed.
UNASSIGNED: Prediction of human toxicity early in the drug development process remains a major challenge, necessitating the development of more physiologically relevant liver models and careful selection of drug-induced liver injury (DILI)-positive and -negative control drugs to better predict the risk of DILI associated with new drug candidates. Thus, this systematic study has crucial implications for standardizing the validation of new in vitro models of DILI. By establishing a consensus-driven list of positive and negative control drugs, the study provides a scientifically justified framework for enhancing the consistency of preclinical testing, thereby addressing a significant challenge in early hepatotoxicity identification. Practically, these findings can guide researchers in evaluating safety profiles of new drugs, refining in vitro models, and informing regulatory agencies on potential improvements to regulatory guidelines, ensuring a more systematic and efficient approach to drug safety assessment.

BACKGROUND: Causality assessment of suspected drug-induced liver injury (DILI) during metabolic dysfunction-associated steatohepatitis (MASH) clinical trials can be challenging, and liver biopsies are not routinely performed as part of this evaluation. While the field is moving away from liver biopsy as a diagnostic and prognostic tool, information not identified by non-invasive testing may be provided on histology.
OBJECTIVE: To address the appropriate utilisation of liver biopsy as part of DILI causality assessment in this setting.
METHODS: From 2020 to 2022, the Liver Forum convened a series of webinars on issues pertaining to liver biopsy during MASH trials. The Histology Working Group was formed to generate a series of consensus documents addressing these challenges. This manuscript focuses on liver biopsy as part of DILI causality assessment.
RESULTS: Expert opinion, guidance and recommendations on the role of liver biopsy as part of causality assessment of suspected DILI occurring during clinical trials for a drug(s) being developed for MASH are provided. Lessons learned from prior MASH programs are reviewed and gaps identified.
CONCLUSIONS: Although there are no pathognomonic features, histologic evaluation of suspected DILI during MASH clinical trials may alter patient management, define the pattern and severity of injury, detect findings that favour a diagnosis of DILI versus MASH progression, identify prognostic features, characterise the clinicopathological phenotype of DILI, and/or define lesions that influence decisions about trial discontinuation and further development of the drug.

With the increase in the medical level, the improvement of adverse drug reaction(ADR) monitoring systems, and the enhancement of public awareness of safe medication, drug safety incidents have been frequently reported. Drug-induced liver injury(DILI), especially liver injury attributed to herbal and dietary supplements(HDS), has globally attracted high attention, bringing great threats and severe challenges to the people for drug safety management such as clinical medication and medical supervision. Consensus on drug-induced liver injury had been published by the Council for International Organizations of Medical Sciences(CIOMS) in 2020. In this consensus, liver injury attributed to HDS was included in a special chapter for the first time. The hot topics, including the definition of HDS-induced liver injury, epidemiological history, potential risk factors, collection of related risk signals, causality assessment, risk prevention, control and management were discussed from a global perspective. Based on the previous works, some experts from China were invited by CIOMS to undertake the compilation of this chapter. Meanwhile, a new causality assessment in DILI based on the integrated evidence chain(iEC) method was widely recognized by experts in China and abroad, and was recommended by this consensus. This paper briefly introduced the main contents, background, and characteristics of the Consensus on drug-induced liver injury. Significantly, a brief interpretation was illustrated to analyze the special highlights of Chapter 8, "Liver injury attributed to HDS", so as to provide practical references for the medical staff and the researchers who worked on either Chinese or Western medicine in China.

Drug-induced liver injury influencing factors are complex and have diverse clinical manifestations. Simple and reliable diagnostic methods are still deficient, and further classification of toxicological mechanisms is required. There are numerous pertinent discrepancies between domestic and international guidelines aimed at drug-induced liver injury diagnosis and treatment, with partial to no consensus on the content. The American Gastroenterological Association\'s 2021 Clinical Guidelines, the Asia-Pacific Association for the Study of the Liver\'s 2021 Consensus Guidelines, the Council for International Organizations of Medical Sciences\' 2020 International Consensus, the European Society\'s Hepatology Committee\'s 2019 Clinical Practice Guidelines, and the 2015 Chinese Medical Association Guidelines are five influential clinical guidelines on drug-induced liver injury at home and abroad. The epidemiology, risk factors, diagnosis and evaluation, treatment management, and other contents, particularly traditional Chinese medicine, were compared and analyzed using other relevant consensus opinions or guidelines in order to improve understanding and provide a reference for clinical diagnosis and treatment of drug-induced liver injury.
药物性肝损伤的影响因素复杂，临床表现多样，尚缺乏简便可靠的诊断方法，毒理机制等也有待进一步明确。针对药物性肝损伤的诊治，国内外相关指南存在诸多差异，部分内容未形成共识。现选择国内外影响较大的5个药物性肝损伤临床指南——2021美国胃肠病学会临床指南、2021亚太肝病学会共识指南、2020国际医学组织理事会药物性肝损伤国际共识、2019欧洲肝病学会临床实践指南、2015中华医学会药物性肝损伤诊治指南等，并参考其他相关共识意见或指南，就药物性肝损伤尤其中草药肝损伤的流行病学、风险因素、诊断评估、治疗管理等内容进行比较分析，以期提高认识，为药物性肝损伤的临床诊断和治疗提供参考。.

Drug-induced liver injury (DILI) is an important adverse drug reaction that can lead to acute liver failure or even death in severe cases. Currently, the diagnosis of DILI still follows the strategy of exclusion. Therefore, a detailed history taking and a thorough and careful exclusion of other potential causes of liver injury is the key to correct diagnosis. This guideline was developed based on evidence-based medicine provided by the latest research advances and aims to provide professional guidance to clinicians on how to identify suspected DILI timely and standardize the diagnosis and management in clinical practice. Based on the clinical settings in China, the guideline also specifically focused on DILI in chronic liver disease, drug-induced viral hepatitis reactivation, common causing agents of DILI (herbal and dietary supplements, anti-tuberculosis drugs, anti-neoplastic drugs), and signal and assessment of DILI in clinical trials.
药物性肝损伤（DILI）是重要的药物不良反应，严重者可导致急性肝衰竭甚至死亡。目前，DILI的诊断仍是排他性的策略，因此，详细的病史采集、全面仔细地排除肝损伤的其他潜在病因，是建立正确诊断的关键。本指南根据最新研究进展提供的循证医学证据制定，旨在为临床医生在实践中如何及时识别疑似DILI患者，规范诊断和管理提供专业的指导。根据我国的实际情况，指南也专门重点阐述了慢性肝病基础上的DILI、药物导致的肝炎病毒再激活、DILI的常见病因（草药和膳食补充剂、抗结核药物、抗肿瘤药物），以及临床试验中DILI的信号和评估等内容。.

Drug-induced liver injury (DILI) is the principal reason for failure in developing drug candidates. It is the most common reason to withdraw from the market after a drug has been approved for clinical use. In this context, data from animal models, liver function tests, and chemical properties could complement each other to understand DILI events better and prevent them. Since the chemical space concept improves decision-making drug design related to the prediction of structure-property relationships, side effects, and polypharmacology drug activity (uniquely mentioning the most recent advances), it is an attractive approach to combining different phenomena influencing DILI events (e.g., individual \"chemical spaces\") and exploring all events simultaneously in an integrated analysis of the DILI-relevant chemical space. However, currently, no systematic methods allow the fusion of a collection of different chemical spaces to collect different types of data on a unique chemical space representation, namely \"consensus chemical space.\" This study is the first report that implements data fusion to consider different criteria simultaneously to facilitate the analysis of DILI-related events. In particular, the study highlights the importance of analyzing together in vitro and chemical data (e.g., topology, bond order, atom types, presence of rings, ring sizes, and aromaticity of compounds encoded on RDKit fingerprints). These properties could be aimed at improving the understanding of DILI events.

Idiosyncratic drug-induced liver injury mimics acute and chronic liver disease. It is under recognized and underrecognised because of the lack of pathognomonic diagnostic serological markers. Its consequences may vary from being asymptomatic to self-limiting illness to severe liver injury leading to acute liver failure. Its incidence is likely to be more common in Asia than other parts of the world, mainly because of hepatotoxicity resulting from the treatment of tuberculosis disease and the ubiquitous use of traditional and complimentary medicines in Asian countries. This APASL consensus guidelines on DILI is a concise account of the various aspects including current evidence-based information on DILI with special emphasis on DILI due to antituberculosis agents and traditional and complementary medicine use in Asia.

Acute liver failure (ALF) is an infrequent, unpredictable, potentially fatal complication of acute liver injury (ALI) consequent to varied etiologies. Etiologies of ALF as reported in the literature have regional differences, which affects the clinical presentation and natural course. In this part of the consensus article designed to reflect the clinical practices in India, disease burden, epidemiology, clinical presentation, monitoring, and prognostication have been discussed. In India, viral hepatitis is the most frequent cause of ALF, with drug-induced hepatitis due to antituberculosis drugs being the second most frequent cause. The clinical presentation of ALF is characterized by jaundice, coagulopathy, and encephalopathy. It is important to differentiate ALF from other causes of liver failure, including acute on chronic liver failure, subacute liver failure, as well as certain tropical infections which can mimic this presentation. The disease often has a fulminant clinical course with high short-term mortality. Death is usually attributable to cerebral complications, infections, and resultant multiorgan failure. Timely liver transplantation (LT) can change the outcome, and hence, it is vital to provide intensive care to patients until LT can be arranged. It is equally important to assess prognosis to select patients who are suitable for LT. Several prognostic scores have been proposed, and their comparisons show that indigenously developed dynamic scores have an edge over scores described from the Western world. Management of ALF will be described in part 2 of this document.

The Clinical Practice Guidelines (CPG) on Occupational Liver Diseases (OLD) of the European Association for the Study of the Liver (EASL) have been developed to increase awareness, recognition and improve management of patients with OLD. Indeed, although workplace exposure has been associated with virtually the entire spectrum of acute and chronic liver diseases, data on the epidemiology of OLD are scarce. These diseases may be a result of high-level accidental exposure or prolonged lower level exposure to a variety of chemicals including solvents, pesticides, metals and other agents. While acute liver diseases related to OLD are uncommon and easily recognized, chronic liver diseases are relatively more frequent but often overlooked because of their asymptomatic course and an insidious onset which is often accompanied by comorbidities. Because of the absence of data in observational studies and meta-analyses or systematic reviews, the evidence and recommendations in these guidelines have been graded according to the Oxford Centre for Evidence-based Medicine, which assesses evidence according to diagnostic, prevalence, aetiological, prognostic or preventive categories. They can still generate grades of recommendation even when the evidence is inconclusive.