Tenofovir 1% vaginal gel for prevention of HIV-1 infection in women in South Africa (FACTS-001): a phase 3, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial.
Abstract
Background Young women in southern Africa have substantial risk of HIV acquisition. Female-controlled biomedical interventions are needed to mitigate this risk. We aimed to assess the safety and efficacy of a pericoitally applied tenofovir 1% gel.Methods We did a phase 3, double-blind, randomised, placebo-controlled trial at nine community-based clinical trial sites in South Africa to evaluate the safety and efficacy of tenofovir 1% gel. Sexually active women who were HIV negative and aged 18-30 years were enrolled. Participants were randomly assigned (1:1) using sequential participant numbers to either tenofovir 1% gel or a placebo gel (one dose within 12 h before sex and one dose within 12 h after sex [BAT-24 regimen]), using dynamic permuted block sizes of 8 and 16 within each site. Women received monthly HIV-1 testing, risk reduction support, physical examinations, and product dispensing for up to 27 months. The primary efficacy outcome was incident HIV infection and the primary safety outcome was occurrence of grade 2-4 adverse events, both analysed in the modified intention-to-treat population. To assess the efficacy of tenofovir gel, the cumulative probability of HIV infection was calculated for each treatment using the Kaplan-Meier method. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01386294.Findings From Oct 11, 2011, to Aug 29, 2014, 3844 women were screened, 2059 enrolled, and 2029 included in the primary analysis (1032 in the tenofovir group and 1027 in the placebo group); 39 (4%) in the tenofovir group and 36 (4%) in the placebo group were lost to follow-up. 123 HIV-1 infections occurred over 3036 woman-years of observation; 61 in the tenofovir group (HIV incidence 4·0 per 100 woman-years, 95% CI 3·1-5·2) and 62 in the placebo group (4·0 per 100 woman-years, 3·1-5·2; incidence rate ratio [IRR] 0·98, 95% CI 0·7-1·4). A higher incidence of grade 2 adverse events was observed in the tenofovir group than in the placebo group (IRR 1·09, 95% CI 1·0-1·2; p=0·02). The most common grade 2 or higher product-related adverse events were hypophosphataemia (n=22 for tenofovir vs n=22 for placebo), genital symptoms (n=6 for tenofovir vs n=2 for placebo), or elevated transaminases (n=2 for tenofovir vs n=2 for placebo). No product-related serious adverse events were reported, and no differences in product-related adverse events (p=0·78), grade 3 events (p=0·64), or grade 4 events (p=0·74) were observed between treatment groups.Interpretation Overall, pericoital tenofovir gel did not prevent HIV-1 acquisition in this population of young women at risk of HIV infection in South Africa. Alternate safe and effective products that are less user dependent than this product or do not require high adherence are needed.Funding The US Agency for International Development (USAID), the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, and the South African Department of Science and Technology and Department of Health.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Prevention of HIV infection with tenofovir gel, especially among women, has not been demonstrated.
“Adherence can be low (48), and prevention of HIV infection, especially among women, has not been demonstrated (47,49).”
From Sexually Transmitted Infections Treatment Guidelines, 2021 (2021) · cites this paper as [49]
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 32 · Cited by 95
- Authors
- Delany-Moretlwe, S., Lombard, C., Baron, D., Bekker, L.-G., Nkala, B., Ahmed, K., Sebe, M., Brumskine, W., Nchabeleng, M., Palanee-Philips, T., Ntshangase, J., Sibiya, S., Smith, E., Panchia, R., Myer, L., Schwartz, J. L., Marzinke, M., Morris, L., Brown, E. R., Doncel, G. F., Gray, G., & Rees, H.
- Affiliations
- University of Cape Town (ZA)
- University of the Witwatersrand (ZA)
- Setshaba Research Centre (ZA)
- Aurum Institute (ZA)
- Eastern Virginia Medical School (US)
- Johns Hopkins University (US)
- National Health Laboratory Service (ZA)
- Fred Hutch Cancer Center (US)
- South African Medical Research Council (ZA)
- ORCID
- Venue
- The Lancet Infectious Diseases
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2018-11
- Volume
- 18
- Issue
- 11
- Pages
- 1241-1250
- ISSN
- 1473-3099 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2898138831
- Cited by
- 95
- References
- 32
- Citations by year
- 2026: 3 · 2025: 8 · 2024: 8 · 2023: 4 · 2022: 11 · 2021: 22 · 2020: 13 · 2019: 22 · 2018: 2 · 2017: 2
- FWCI
- 11.14
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- The Lancet Infectious Diseases (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Funders
- Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation (OPP41266)
- Eastern Virginia Medical School (GMDA-11-43)
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Infectious Diseases › HIV/AIDS Research and Interventions
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Infectious Diseases › HIV/AIDS drug development and treatment
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Epidemiology › Cervical Cancer and HPV Research
- Keywords
- HIV-1 prevention, pre-exposure prophylaxis, women, young women, HIV incidence, South Africa, HIV testing, loss to follow-up
- MeSH terms
- Tenofovir, Double-Blind Method, Female, Humans, Placebos, South Africa, Vaginal Creams, Foams, and Jellies, HIV Infections, Treatment Outcome, Disease Transmission, Infectious, Anti-HIV Agents, Drug-Related Side Effects and Adverse Reactions
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review