Head-to-head evidence
Elsulfavirine vs Rilpivirine
Same mechanism, same race: design-graded trial evidence for both assets, with the grading rationale shown. Grades describe the quality of the evidence, never the merits of either security.
HIV
Shared mechanism: HIV reverse transcriptase · full HIV pipeline
Elsulfavirine · Elpida
Marketed by Viriom
NCT02489461 · Phase 2/3 · completed
The study randomized 150 participants and used double blinding with an active efavirenz comparator. Its primary endpoint was the proportion with HIV-1 RNA below 400 copies/mL at Week 12, but no results are posted, so the outcome comparison cannot be assessed.
Rilpivirine · Edurant
Marketed by Johnson & Johnson and partners
NCT00540449 · Phase 3 · completed
This was a large (690-participant), randomized, quadruple-blinded, active-controlled (efavirenz) phase 3 trial with a hard clinical endpoint (confirmed viral load <50 copies/mL). The pre-specified non-inferiority margin was clearly met, with the confidence interval for the treatment difference falling entirely within the allowed -12% boundary, so rilpivirine was shown to be as effective as efavirenz on the primary measure despite a somewhat higher rate of virologic failure and resistance emergence as a secondary finding.
Next expected readout: October 2026 · NCT05660980 (registry estimate)
The full competitive landscape for each asset (every same-race competitor with aligned evidence, sortable) is on the asset pages: Elsulfavirine's landscape · Rilpivirine's landscape