Skip to main content
. 2022 May 7;399(10337):1779–1789. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(22)00538-4

Table 2.

Cabotegravir effectiveness, overall and by subgroup

Events per total PY in cabotegravir group Events per total PY in TDF-FTC group HR (95% CI)* p value
Overall 4/1956 (0·20%) 36/1942 (1·85%) 0·12 (0·05–0·31) <0·0001
Age .. .. .. 0·53
<25 years 3/866 (0·35%) 20/851 (2·34%) 0·17 (0·05–0·54) ..
≥25 years 1/1090 (0·09%) 16/1091 (1·47%) 0·09 (0·02–0·49) ..
Contraceptive method .. .. .. 0·87
DMPA 3/1009 (0·30%) 21/1000 (2·10%) 0·16 (0·05–0·53) ..
NET-EN 1/175 (0·57%) 6/182 (3·30%) 0·22 (0·03–1·48) ..
Implant 0 8/607 (1·32%) 0·06 (0·00–1·16) ..
Other 0 1/152 (0·66%) 0·32 (0·01–9·89) ..
Body-mass index .. .. .. ..
≤30 kg/m2 4/1389 (0·29%) 27/1447 (1·87%) 0·16 (0·06–0·45) 0·47
>30 kg/m2 0 9/495 (1·82%) 0·05 (0·00–0·96) ..

HR=hazard ratio. PY=person-years. TDF-FTC=tenofovir disoproxil fumarate plus emtricitabine. DMPA=depot medroxyprogesterone acetate. NET-EN=norethisterone enanthate.

*

Firth's method was used to estimate the HR and 95% CI when the subgroup had zero infections (used for subgroup analysis only, stratified by site).

Median unbiased estimate HR (95% CI) for cabotegravir versus TDF-FTC overall displayed.