Thought about Akero's NASH/cirrhosis drug -- "Akero said the study’s primary goal of improving liver fibrosis, or scarring, was not achieved."

Reducing the fibrosis seems like a pretty high bar -- what it they had stuck to non-progression? I can't remember what the other drug it was that just barely missed their endpoint because they set such a high bar (it was NOT a NASH drug, it was some other disease) -- but why are companies using such difficult endpoints instead of non-inferiority to existing treatments, if any exist -- or less stringent endpoints, if there aren't any current treatments?