Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Week 48 results from a randomized clinical trial of rilpivirine/emtricitabine/tenofovir disoproxil fumarate vs. efavirenz/emtricitabine/tenofovir disoproxil fumarate in treatment-naive HIV-1-infected adults.
Cohen, Calvin; Wohl, David; Arribas, Jose R; Henry, Keith; Van Lunzen, Jan; Bloch, Mark; Towner, William; Wilkins, Edmund; Ebrahimi, Ramin; Porter, Danielle; White, Kirsten; Walker, Ivan; Chuck, Susan; De-Oertel, Shampa; Fralich, Todd.
Affiliation
  • Cohen C; aCommunity Research Initiative of New England, Boston, Massachusetts bUniversity of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, North Carolina, USA cHospital La Paz, Madrid, Spain dHIV Program Hennepin County Medical Center, Minneapolis, Minnesota, USA eUniversity Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany fHoldsworth House Medical Practice, Darlinghurst, New South Wales, Australia gDepartment of Infectious Disease, Kaiser Los Angeles Medical Center, Los Angeles, California, USA hNorth M
AIDS ; 28(7): 989-97, 2014 Apr 24.
Article in En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-24508782
OBJECTIVES: To compare the safety and efficacy of the two single-tablet regimens (STRs), rilpivirine/emtricitabine/tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (RPV/FTC/TDF) and efavirenz/emtricitabine/tenofovir DF (EFV/FTC/TDF), in HIV-1-infected, treatment-naive adults. DESIGN: This is a phase 3b, randomized, open-label, multicenter, international, 96-week study. METHODS: Participants were randomized 1:1 to receive either RPV/FTC/TDF or EFV/FTC/TDF. The primary endpoint was the proportion of participants with HIV-1 RNA less than 50 copies/ml at week 48 by the Snapshot algorithm. RESULTS: A total of 786 participants were randomized. RPV/FTC/TDF was noninferior to EFV/FTC/TDF (85.8 vs. 81.6%) at week 48 for HIV-1 RNA less than 50 copies/ml [difference 4.1%, 95% confidence interval (CI) -1.1 to 9.2%]. A statistically significant difference in efficacy favoring RPV/FTC/TDF was demonstrated for participants with baseline HIV-1 RNA 100000  copies/ml or less [(n=510) 88.8% RPV/FTC/TDF vs. 81.6% EFV/FTC/TDF (difference 7.2%, 95% CI 1.1-13.4%)]. In participants with baseline HIV-1 RNA more than 100000 copies/ml (n=276), RPV/FTC/TDF demonstrated noninferior efficacy compared with EFV/FTC/TDF (79.9 vs. 81.7%, respectively, difference -1.8%, 95% CI -11.1 to 7.5%). In the RPV/FTC/TDF arm, more virologic failure was observed as baseline HIV-1 RNA levels increased. There were more participants with emergent resistance in the RPV/FTC/TDF arm than in the EFV/FTC/TDF arm (4 vs. 1%, respectively). There were fewer discontinuations because of adverse events with RPV/FTC/TDF (2.5%) than with EFV/FTC/TDF (8.7%). CONCLUSION: In treatment-naive participants, RPV/FTC/TDF demonstrated noninferior efficacy and improved tolerability compared with EFV/FTC/TDF, as well as a statistically significant difference in efficacy for participants with baseline HIV-1 RNA 100000  copies/ml or less at week 48.
Subject(s)

Full text: 1 Collection: 01-internacional Database: MEDLINE Main subject: HIV Infections / Antiretroviral Therapy, Highly Active / Anti-Retroviral Agents Type of study: Clinical_trials Limits: Adult / Female / Humans / Male / Middle aged Language: En Journal: AIDS Journal subject: SINDROME DA IMUNODEFICIENCIA ADQUIRIDA (AIDS) Year: 2014 Type: Article

Full text: 1 Collection: 01-internacional Database: MEDLINE Main subject: HIV Infections / Antiretroviral Therapy, Highly Active / Anti-Retroviral Agents Type of study: Clinical_trials Limits: Adult / Female / Humans / Male / Middle aged Language: En Journal: AIDS Journal subject: SINDROME DA IMUNODEFICIENCIA ADQUIRIDA (AIDS) Year: 2014 Type: Article