Safety and efficacy of long-acting cabotegravir/rilpivirine versus standard oral antiretroviral therapy: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

backgroundIn 2023, there were 39.9 million people living with HIV (PLWH) worldwide and 630 000 deaths related to HIV. New strategies are needed, and long-acting antiretrovirals (LAAs) are now widely considered to have great potential to help end the HIV epidemic. This systematic review and meta-analysis compare the safety and efficacy of LAA versus standard oral treatment (SOT) for HIV.

methodsPubMed and Embase databases, supplemented by ClinicalTrials.gov and grey literature, were searched. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) reporting efficacy and/or safety of LAA versus SOT for PLWH until June 2024 were included. Efficacy (HIV RNA < 50 copies/mL) and HIV RNA ≥ 50 copies/mL, adverse events (AEs), treatment discontinuation, CD4 count, metabolic parameters and drug resistance were assessed. Prespecified subgroup analyses were conducted. The risk of bias was assessed with Cochrane RoB 2.0. Certainty of evidence was assessed using GRADE.

resultsSix RCTs were eligible for inclusion, involving 2829 participants. LAA was non-inferior to SOT in suppressing HIV RNA < 50 copies/mL [Risk Difference (RD), -0.00; 95% CI, -0.03-0.02; P = 0.83; I2 = 51%; high quality of evidence (QoE)]. LAA was associated with higher drug resistance (percentage pooled estimate, 57%; 95% CI, 33%-78% versus 9%; 95% CI, 2%-30%; moderate QoE) and risk of grade 1-4 AEs than SOT [Risk Ratio (RR), 1.22; 95% CI, 1.12-1.33; P < 0.001; I2 = 62%; moderate QoE].

conclusionsLAA has non-inferior efficacy compared to SOT. However, participants receiving LAA were at a higher risk of developing drug resistance, cross-resistance and AEs.