OBJECTIVES: A week 48 efficacy and safety analysis with respect to gender and race was conducted using pooled data from the phase III, double-blind, double-dummy efficacy comparison in treatment-naïve, HIV-infected subjects of TMC278 and efavirenz (ECHO) and TMC278 against HIV, in a once-daily regimen versus efavirenz (THRIVE) trials. METHODS:Treatment-naïve, HIV-1-infected adults were randomized to receive rilpivirine (RPV; TMC278) 25 mg once a day (qd), or efavirenz (EFV) 600 mg qd, plus tenofovir/emtricitabine (ECHO) or tenofovir/emtricitabine, zidovudine/lamivudine or abacavir/lamivudine (THRIVE). RESULTS: A total of 1368 participants (76% male and 61% White, of those with available race data) were randomized and treated. No gender-related differences in response rate (percentage of patients with HIV-1 viral load < 50 HIV-1 RNA copies/mL, using an intent-to-treat, time-to-loss-of-virological-response algorithm) were observed (RPV: men, 85%; women, 83%; EFV: men, 82%; women, 83%). Response rates were lower in Black compared with Asian and White participants (RPV: 75% vs. 95% and 85%, respectively; EFV: 74% vs. 93% and 83%, respectively); this finding was mostly a result of higher discontinuation and virological failure rates in Black patients. Safety findings were generally similar across race and gender subgroups. However, nausea occurred more commonly in women than in men in both treatment groups. In men, diarrhoea was more frequent in the EFV group, and abnormal dreams/nightmares were more frequent in men in both the EFV and RPV groups. CONCLUSIONS:Overall response rates were high for both RPV and EFV. No gender differences were observed. However, response rates were lower among Black patients, regardless of treatment group. Gender appeared to influence the incidence of gastrointestinal adverse events and abnormal dreams/nightmares for both treatments.
RCT Entities:
OBJECTIVES: A week 48 efficacy and safety analysis with respect to gender and race was conducted using pooled data from the phase III, double-blind, double-dummy efficacy comparison in treatment-naïve, HIV-infected subjects of TMC278 and efavirenz (ECHO) and TMC278 against HIV, in a once-daily regimen versus efavirenz (THRIVE) trials. METHODS: Treatment-naïve, HIV-1-infected adults were randomized to receive rilpivirine (RPV; TMC278) 25 mg once a day (qd), or efavirenz (EFV) 600 mg qd, plus tenofovir/emtricitabine (ECHO) or tenofovir/emtricitabine, zidovudine/lamivudine or abacavir/lamivudine (THRIVE). RESULTS: A total of 1368 participants (76% male and 61% White, of those with available race data) were randomized and treated. No gender-related differences in response rate (percentage of patients with HIV-1 viral load < 50 HIV-1 RNA copies/mL, using an intent-to-treat, time-to-loss-of-virological-response algorithm) were observed (RPV: men, 85%; women, 83%; EFV: men, 82%; women, 83%). Response rates were lower in Black compared with Asian and White participants (RPV: 75% vs. 95% and 85%, respectively; EFV: 74% vs. 93% and 83%, respectively); this finding was mostly a result of higher discontinuation and virological failure rates in Black patients. Safety findings were generally similar across race and gender subgroups. However, nausea occurred more commonly in women than in men in both treatment groups. In men, diarrhoea was more frequent in the EFV group, and abnormal dreams/nightmares were more frequent in men in both the EFV and RPV groups. CONCLUSIONS: Overall response rates were high for both RPV and EFV. No gender differences were observed. However, response rates were lower among Black patients, regardless of treatment group. Gender appeared to influence the incidence of gastrointestinal adverse events and abnormal dreams/nightmares for both treatments.