Head-to-head evidence
Emtricitabine/tenofovir disoproxil fumarate 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
Emtricitabine/tenofovir disoproxil fumarate · Truvada
Marketed by Gilead Sciences
NCT00323544 · Phase 3 · completed
This was a randomized, open-label, active-controlled trial of 220 participants, comparing Truvada with Combivir. Its primary endpoint was a laboratory measure—change in hemoglobin—not a hard clinical or endoscopic outcome. Registry results were not posted at the time of grading; the key result shown was recovered from the cited external source.
Next expected readout: December 2026 · NCT07584122 (registry estimate)
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: Emtricitabine/tenofovir disoproxil fumarate's landscape · Rilpivirine's landscape