Rilpivirine versus efavirenz with tenofovir and emtricitabine in treatment-naive adults infected with HIV-1 (ECHO): A phase 3 randomised double-blind active-controlled trial

Jean Michel Molina, Pedro Cahn, Beatriz Grinsztejn, Adriano Lazzarin, Anthony Mills, Michael Saag, Khuanchai Supparatpinyo, Sharon Walmsley, Herta Crauwels, Laurence T. Rimsky, Simon Vanveggel, Katia Boven

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

Background Efavirenz with tenofovir-disoproxil-fumarate and emtricitabine is a preferred antiretroviral regimen for treatment-naive patients infected with HIV-1. Rilpivirine, a new non-nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor, has shown similar antiviral efficacy to efavirenz in a phase 2b trial with two nucleoside/nucleotide reverse transcriptase inhibitors. We aimed to assess the efficacy, safety, and tolerability of rilpivirine versus efavirenz, each combined with tenofovir-disoproxil-fumarate and emtricitabine. Methods We did a phase 3, randomised, double-blind, double-dummy, active-controlled trial, in patients infected with HIV-1 who were treatment-naive. The patients were aged 18 years or older with a plasma viral load at screening of 5000 copies per mL or greater, and viral sensitivity to all study drugs. Our trial was done at 112 sites across 21 countries. Patients were randomly assigned by a computer-generated interactive web response system to receive either once-daily 25 mg rilpivirine or once-daily 600 mg efavirenz, each with tenofovir- disoproxil-fumarate and emtricitabine. Our primary objective was to show non-inferiority (12 margin) of rilpivirine to efavirenz in terms of the percentage of patients with confirmed response (viral load

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)238-246
Number of pages9
JournalLancet
Volume378
Issue number9787
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - Jul 16 2011

Fingerprint

Rilpivirine
Tenofovir
efavirenz
HIV-1
Reverse Transcriptase Inhibitors
Viral Load
Therapeutics
Nucleosides
Antiviral Agents
Nucleotides
Emtricitabine
Safety

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Medicine(all)

Cite this

Rilpivirine versus efavirenz with tenofovir and emtricitabine in treatment-naive adults infected with HIV-1 (ECHO) : A phase 3 randomised double-blind active-controlled trial. / Molina, Jean Michel; Cahn, Pedro; Grinsztejn, Beatriz; Lazzarin, Adriano; Mills, Anthony; Saag, Michael; Supparatpinyo, Khuanchai; Walmsley, Sharon; Crauwels, Herta; Rimsky, Laurence T.; Vanveggel, Simon; Boven, Katia.

In: Lancet, Vol. 378, No. 9787, 16.07.2011, p. 238-246.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Molina, JM, Cahn, P, Grinsztejn, B, Lazzarin, A, Mills, A, Saag, M, Supparatpinyo, K, Walmsley, S, Crauwels, H, Rimsky, LT, Vanveggel, S & Boven, K 2011, 'Rilpivirine versus efavirenz with tenofovir and emtricitabine in treatment-naive adults infected with HIV-1 (ECHO): A phase 3 randomised double-blind active-controlled trial', Lancet, vol. 378, no. 9787, pp. 238-246. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(11)60936-7
Molina, Jean Michel ; Cahn, Pedro ; Grinsztejn, Beatriz ; Lazzarin, Adriano ; Mills, Anthony ; Saag, Michael ; Supparatpinyo, Khuanchai ; Walmsley, Sharon ; Crauwels, Herta ; Rimsky, Laurence T. ; Vanveggel, Simon ; Boven, Katia. / Rilpivirine versus efavirenz with tenofovir and emtricitabine in treatment-naive adults infected with HIV-1 (ECHO) : A phase 3 randomised double-blind active-controlled trial. In: Lancet. 2011 ; Vol. 378, No. 9787. pp. 238-246.
@article{d54d0b9c93144f58bbe4e53561ef6da3,
title = "Rilpivirine versus efavirenz with tenofovir and emtricitabine in treatment-naive adults infected with HIV-1 (ECHO): A phase 3 randomised double-blind active-controlled trial",
abstract = "Background Efavirenz with tenofovir-disoproxil-fumarate and emtricitabine is a preferred antiretroviral regimen for treatment-naive patients infected with HIV-1. Rilpivirine, a new non-nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor, has shown similar antiviral efficacy to efavirenz in a phase 2b trial with two nucleoside/nucleotide reverse transcriptase inhibitors. We aimed to assess the efficacy, safety, and tolerability of rilpivirine versus efavirenz, each combined with tenofovir-disoproxil-fumarate and emtricitabine. Methods We did a phase 3, randomised, double-blind, double-dummy, active-controlled trial, in patients infected with HIV-1 who were treatment-naive. The patients were aged 18 years or older with a plasma viral load at screening of 5000 copies per mL or greater, and viral sensitivity to all study drugs. Our trial was done at 112 sites across 21 countries. Patients were randomly assigned by a computer-generated interactive web response system to receive either once-daily 25 mg rilpivirine or once-daily 600 mg efavirenz, each with tenofovir- disoproxil-fumarate and emtricitabine. Our primary objective was to show non-inferiority (12 margin) of rilpivirine to efavirenz in terms of the percentage of patients with confirmed response (viral load",
author = "Molina, {Jean Michel} and Pedro Cahn and Beatriz Grinsztejn and Adriano Lazzarin and Anthony Mills and Michael Saag and Khuanchai Supparatpinyo and Sharon Walmsley and Herta Crauwels and Rimsky, {Laurence T.} and Simon Vanveggel and Katia Boven",
year = "2011",
month = "7",
day = "16",
doi = "10.1016/S0140-6736(11)60936-7",
language = "English",
volume = "378",
pages = "238--246",
journal = "The Lancet",
issn = "0140-6736",
publisher = "Lancet Publishing Group",
number = "9787",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Rilpivirine versus efavirenz with tenofovir and emtricitabine in treatment-naive adults infected with HIV-1 (ECHO)

T2 - A phase 3 randomised double-blind active-controlled trial

AU - Molina, Jean Michel

AU - Cahn, Pedro

AU - Grinsztejn, Beatriz

AU - Lazzarin, Adriano

AU - Mills, Anthony

AU - Saag, Michael

AU - Supparatpinyo, Khuanchai

AU - Walmsley, Sharon

AU - Crauwels, Herta

AU - Rimsky, Laurence T.

AU - Vanveggel, Simon

AU - Boven, Katia

PY - 2011/7/16

Y1 - 2011/7/16

N2 - Background Efavirenz with tenofovir-disoproxil-fumarate and emtricitabine is a preferred antiretroviral regimen for treatment-naive patients infected with HIV-1. Rilpivirine, a new non-nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor, has shown similar antiviral efficacy to efavirenz in a phase 2b trial with two nucleoside/nucleotide reverse transcriptase inhibitors. We aimed to assess the efficacy, safety, and tolerability of rilpivirine versus efavirenz, each combined with tenofovir-disoproxil-fumarate and emtricitabine. Methods We did a phase 3, randomised, double-blind, double-dummy, active-controlled trial, in patients infected with HIV-1 who were treatment-naive. The patients were aged 18 years or older with a plasma viral load at screening of 5000 copies per mL or greater, and viral sensitivity to all study drugs. Our trial was done at 112 sites across 21 countries. Patients were randomly assigned by a computer-generated interactive web response system to receive either once-daily 25 mg rilpivirine or once-daily 600 mg efavirenz, each with tenofovir- disoproxil-fumarate and emtricitabine. Our primary objective was to show non-inferiority (12 margin) of rilpivirine to efavirenz in terms of the percentage of patients with confirmed response (viral load

AB - Background Efavirenz with tenofovir-disoproxil-fumarate and emtricitabine is a preferred antiretroviral regimen for treatment-naive patients infected with HIV-1. Rilpivirine, a new non-nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor, has shown similar antiviral efficacy to efavirenz in a phase 2b trial with two nucleoside/nucleotide reverse transcriptase inhibitors. We aimed to assess the efficacy, safety, and tolerability of rilpivirine versus efavirenz, each combined with tenofovir-disoproxil-fumarate and emtricitabine. Methods We did a phase 3, randomised, double-blind, double-dummy, active-controlled trial, in patients infected with HIV-1 who were treatment-naive. The patients were aged 18 years or older with a plasma viral load at screening of 5000 copies per mL or greater, and viral sensitivity to all study drugs. Our trial was done at 112 sites across 21 countries. Patients were randomly assigned by a computer-generated interactive web response system to receive either once-daily 25 mg rilpivirine or once-daily 600 mg efavirenz, each with tenofovir- disoproxil-fumarate and emtricitabine. Our primary objective was to show non-inferiority (12 margin) of rilpivirine to efavirenz in terms of the percentage of patients with confirmed response (viral load

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=79960381844&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=79960381844&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/S0140-6736(11)60936-7

DO - 10.1016/S0140-6736(11)60936-7

M3 - Article

C2 - 21763936

AN - SCOPUS:79960381844

VL - 378

SP - 238

EP - 246

JO - The Lancet

JF - The Lancet

SN - 0140-6736

IS - 9787

ER -