emtricitabine
Sources réglementaires consultées
Indications approuvées
- Traitement du VIH-1 chez l’adulte et l’enfant à partir de 4 mois, toujours avec d’autres antirétroviraux.
Contre-indications
Absolues
- Hypersensibilité à l’emtricitabine.
Mises en garde cliniques
- Mise en garde majeure · Ne pas utiliser en monothérapie du VIH ni avec d’autres produits contenant emtricitabine ou lamivudine. — CIMA/AEMPS, ficha técnica 03261003
- En cas de coinfection VIH/VHB, l’arrêt peut provoquer une exacerbation de l’hépatite B ; surveiller la fonction hépatique. — CIMA/AEMPS, ficha técnica 03261003
Interactions médicamenteuses
- ModéréeProduits contenant emtricitabine ou lamivudine
Mécanisme: Ils dupliquent des principes actifs avec résistance croisée et toxicité.
Recommandation: Ne pas les associer.
CIMA/AEMPS, ficha técnica 03261003
Effets indésirables
Communs (≥1%)
Céphalées, diarrhée, nausées, augmentation de la créatine kinase et modification de la pigmentation cutanée
Rares mais graves
Acidose lactique, hépatomégalie avec stéatose et exacerbation de l’hépatite B après l’arrêt
Grossesse et allaitement
Elle peut être envisagée pendant la grossesse si nécessaire. Ne pas allaiter pendant le traitement.
Bibliographie récente (PubMed)
There are gaps in uptake of, adherence to, and persistence in the use of preexposure prophylaxis for human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) prevention among cisgender women. We conducted a phase 3, double-blind, randomized, controlled trial involving adolescent girls and young women in South Africa and Uganda. Participants were assigned in a 2:2:1 ratio to receive subcutaneous lenacapavir every 26 weeks, daily oral emtricitabine-tenofovir alafenamide (F/TAF), or daily oral emtricitabine-tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (F/TDF; active control); all participants also received the alternate subcutaneous or oral placebo. We assessed the efficacy of lenacapavir and F/TAF by comparing the incidence of HIV infection with the estimated background incidence in the screened population and evaluated relative efficacy as compared with F/TDF. Among 5338 participants who were initially HIV-negative, 55 incident HIV infections were observed: 0 infections among 2134 participants in the lenacapavir group (0 per 100 person-years; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.00 to 0.19), 39 infections among 2136 participants in the F/TAF group (2.02 per 100 person-years; 95% CI, 1.44 to 2.76), and 16 infections among 1068 participants in the F/TDF group (1.69 per 100 person-years; 95% CI, 0.96 to 2.74). Background HIV incidence in the screened population (8094 participants) was 2.41 per 100 person-years (95% CI, 1.82 to 3.19). HIV incidence with lenacapavir was significantly lower than background HIV incidence (incidence rate ratio, 0.00; 95% CI, 0.00 to 0.04; P<0.001) and than HIV incidence with F/TDF (incidence rate ratio, 0.00; 95% CI, 0.00 to 0.10; P<0.001). HIV incidence with F/TAF did not differ significantly from background HIV incidence (incidence rate ratio, 0.84; 95% CI, 0.55 to 1.28; P = 0.21), and no evidence of a meaningful difference in HIV incidence was observed between F/TAF and F/TDF (incidence rate ratio, 1.20; 95% CI, 0.67 to 2.14). Adherence to F/TAF and F/TDF was low. No safety conce
Twice-yearly subcutaneous lenacapavir has been shown to be efficacious for prevention of human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) infection in cisgender women. The efficacy of lenacapavir for preexposure prophylaxis (PrEP) in cisgender men, transgender women, transgender men, and gender-nonbinary persons is unclear. In this phase 3, double-blind, randomized, active-controlled trial, we randomly assigned participants in a 2:1 ratio to receive subcutaneous lenacapavir every 26 weeks or daily oral emtricitabine-tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (F/TDF). The primary efficacy analysis compared the incidence of HIV infection in the lenacapavir group with the background HIV incidence in the screened population. The secondary efficacy analysis compared the incidence of HIV infection in the lenacapavir group with that in the F/TDF group. Among 3265 participants who were included in the modified intention-to-treat analysis, HIV infections occurred in 2 participants in the lenacapavir group (0.10 per 100 person-years; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.01 to 0.37) and in 9 participants in the F/TDF group (0.93 per 100 person-years; 95% CI, 0.43 to 1.77). The background HIV incidence in the screened population (4634 participants) was 2.37 per 100 person-years (95% CI, 1.65 to 3.42). The incidence of HIV infection in the lenacapavir group was significantly lower than both the background incidence (incidence rate ratio, 0.04; 95% CI, 0.01 to 0.18; P<0.001) and the incidence in the F/TDF group (incidence rate ratio, 0.11; 95% CI, 0.02 to 0.51; P = 0.002). No safety concerns were identified. A total of 26 of 2183 participants (1.2%) in the lenacapavir group and 3 of 1088 (0.3%) in the F/TDF group discontinued the trial regimen because of injection-site reactions. The HIV incidence with twice-yearly lenacapavir was significantly lower than the background incidence and the incidence with F/TDF. (Funded by Gilead Sciences; PURPOSE 2 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT04925752.).
To conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of the effectiveness and safety of oral pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) to prevent HIV. Databases (PubMed, Embase and the Cochrane Register of Controlled Trials) were searched up to 5 July 2020. Search terms for 'HIV' were combined with terms for 'PrEP' or 'tenofovir/emtricitabine'. RCTs were included that compared oral tenofovir-containing PrEP to placebo, no treatment or alternative medication/dosing schedule. The primary outcome was the rate ratio (RR) of HIV infection using a modified intention-to-treat analysis. Secondary outcomes included safety, adherence and risk compensation. All analyses were stratified a priori by population: men who have sex with men (MSM), serodiscordant couples, heterosexuals and people who inject drugs (PWIDs). The quality of individual studies was assessed using the Cochrane risk-of-bias tool, and the certainty of evidence was assessed using GRADE. Of 2803 unique records, 15 RCTs met our inclusion criteria. Over 25 000 participants were included, encompassing 38 289 person-years of follow-up data. PrEP was found to be effective in MSM (RR 0.25, 95% CI 0.1 to 0.61; absolute rate difference (RD) -0.03, 95% CI -0.01 to -0.05), serodiscordant couples (RR 0.25, 95% CI 0.14 to 0.46; RD -0.01, 95% CI -0.01 to -0.02) and PWID (RR 0.51, 95% CI 0.29 to 0.92; RD -0.00, 95% CI -0.00 to -0.01), but not in heterosexuals (RR 0.77, 95% CI 0.46 to 1.29). Efficacy was strongly associated with adherence (p<0.01). PrEP was found to be safe, but unrecognised HIV at enrolment increased the risk of viral drug resistance mutations. Evidence for behaviour change or an increase in sexually transmitted infections was not found. PrEP is safe and effective in MSM, serodiscordant couples and PWIDs. Additional research is needed prior to recommending PrEP in heterosexuals. No RCTs reported effectiveness or safety data for other high-risk groups, such as transgender women and se
Although single-tablet, oral bictegravir, emtricitabine, and tenofovir alafenamide or dolutegravir and lamivudine are preferred regimens in several major guidelines and are widely used in many countries, they have not been compared in a fully powered trial. This study aimed to prospectively compare the 48-week results of dolutegravir and lamivudine versus bictegravir, emtricitabine, and tenofovir alafenamide as maintenance therapies for people with HIV. PASO-DOBLE is a randomised, multicentre, open-label, non-inferiority trial done over 48 weeks at 30 sites in Spain. Adults (aged ≥18 years) with HIV-1, without previous viral failure, who had reached virological suppression on oral regimens containing at least one pill a day, cobicistat, efavirenz, or tenofovir disoproxil fumarate and no previous use of dolutegravir or bictegravir, and plasma HIV-1 RNA <50 copies per mL for at least 24 weeks were eligible. Participants were randomly assigned (1:1) to switch regimens to dolutegravir 50 mg and lamivudine 300 mg or bictegravir 50 mg, emtricitabine 200 mg, and tenofovir alafenamide 25 mg once daily, using random block permutation, stratified by tenofovir alafenamide presence at baseline and sex assigned at birth. The primary endpoint was the proportion of participants with HIV RNA ≥50 copies per mL at week 48 in the intention-to-treat exposed population (ie, all participants who received at least one dose of study medication). The primary and safety analysis was done in the intention-to-treat exposed population. The non-inferiority margin was 4%. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.govNCT04884139 and is incomplete. Between July 14, 2021, and March 24, 2023, 553 participants initiated dolutegravir and lamivudine (n=277) or bictegravir, emtricitabine, and tenofovir alafenamide (n=276). The difference in the proportion of participants with HIV RNA ≥50 copies per mL between the dolutegravir and lamivudine group (six [2%] of 277) and bictegravir, emtricitabine, and t
Cabotegravir plus rilpivirine is the only approved complete long-acting regimen for the maintenance of HIV-1 virological suppression dosed every 2 months. The SOLAR study aimed to compare long-acting cabotegravir plus rilpivirine every 2 months with continued once-daily bictegravir, emtricitabine, and tenofovir alafenamide for the maintenance of HIV-1 virological suppression in adults living with HIV. SOLAR is a randomised, open-label, multicentre, phase 3b, non-inferiority study. The study was done in 118 centres across 14 countries. Participants with HIV-1 RNA less than 50 copies per mL were randomly assigned (2:1), stratified by sex at birth and BMI, to either long-acting cabotegravir (600 mg) plus rilpivirine (900 mg) dosed intramuscularly every 2 months or to continue daily oral bictegravir (50 mg), emtricitabine (200 mg), and tenofovir alafenamide (25 mg). Participants randomly assigned to long-acting therapy had a choice to receive cabotegravir (30 mg) plus rilpivirine (25 mg) once daily as an optional oral lead-in for approximately 1 month. The primary efficacy endpoint was the proportion of participants with virological non-response (HIV-1 RNA ≥50 copies per mL; the US Food and Drug Administration snapshot algorithm, 4% non-inferiority margin; modified intention-to-treat exposed population) at month 11 (long-acting start with injections group) and month 12 (long-acting with oral lead-in group and bictegravir, emtricitabine, and tenofovir alafenamide group). The study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04542070, and is ongoing. 837 participants were screened between Nov 9, 2020, and May 31, 2021, and 687 were randomly assigned to switch treatment or continue existing treatment. Of 670 participants (modified intention-to-treat exposed population), 447 (67%) switched to long-acting therapy (274 [61%] of 447 start with injections; 173 [39%] of 447 with oral lead-in) and 223 (33%) continued bictegravir, emtricitabine, and tenofovir alafenamide. Baseline c