CLINICAL TRIAL, PHASE III
JOURNAL ARTICLE
RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL
RESEARCH SUPPORT, NON-U.S. GOV'T
Add like
Add dislike
Add to saved papers

Rilpivirine versus efavirenz in HIV-1-infected subjects receiving emtricitabine/tenofovir DF: pooled 96-week data from ECHO and THRIVE Studies.

OBJECTIVES: Week 96 efficacy and safety of the non-nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor (NNRTI) rilpivirine (RPV) was compared to efavirenz (EFV) in subset of 1,096 subjects who received emtricitabine/tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (FTC/TDF) in pooled data from 2 phase 3 studies.

METHODS: ECHO and THRIVE are double-blind, double-dummy, randomized, active-controlled, non-inferiority phase 3 studies of RPV versus EFV plus 2 NRTIs in antiretroviral-naïve adult subjects. The primary and secondary endpoints were the proportion of subjects with HIV-1 RNA <50 copies/ mL using an intent-to-treat, time to loss of virologic response (ITT-TLOVR) analysis at weeks 48 and 96, respectively. Safety, tolerability, immunologic response, adherence level, and other measures were also evaluated.

RESULTS: At week 48, noninferior efficacy of RPV+FTC/TDF over EFV+FTC/TDF was established, and at week 96 RPV+FTC/TDF remained noninferior (77% overall response rate in both groups). Through week 96, rates of virologic failure were higher in the RPV+FTC/ TDF group, with low and similar rates of virologic failure and resistance mutations occurring during the second year of follow-up. Treatment with RPV+FTC/TDF was associated with a lower rate of discontinuation due to adverse events and grade 2-4 adverse events including dizziness, abnormal dreams/nightmares, rash, and lipid abnormalities.

CONCLUSIONS: The pooled ECHO and THRIVE studies demonstrated noninferiority of RPV+FTC/TDF in achieving virologic response with safety and tolerability advantages over EFV+FTC/TDF through 96 weeks. Higher rates of virologic failure in the RPV+FTC/TDF group were balanced with higher rates of discontinuations due to adverse events in the EFV+FTC/TDF group.

Full text links

We have located links that may give you full text access.
Can't access the paper?
Try logging in through your university/institutional subscription. For a smoother one-click institutional access experience, please use our mobile app.

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app

Mobile app image

Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app

All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.

By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.

Your Privacy Choices Toggle icon

You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now

Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app