Network meta‐analysis of post‐exposure prophylaxis randomized clinical trials

Objectives: We performed a network meta‐analysis of PEP randomized clinical trials to evaluate the best regimen. / Methods: After MEDLINE/Pubmed search, studies were included if: (1) were randomized, (2) comparing at least 2 PEP three‐drug regimens and, (3) reported completion rates or discontinuation at 28 days. Five studies with 1105 PEP initiations were included and compared ritonavir‐boosted lopinavir (LPV/r) vs. atazanavir (ATV) (one study), cobicistat‐boosted elvitegravir (EVG/c) (one study), raltegravir (RAL) (one study) or maraviroc (MVC) (two studies). We estimated the probability of each treatment of being the best based on the evaluation of five outcomes: PEP non‐completion at day 28, PEP discontinuation due to adverse events, PEP switching due to any cause, lost to follow‐up and adverse events. / Results: Participants were mostly men who have sex with men (n = 832, 75%) with non‐occupational exposure to HIV (89.86%). Four‐hundred fifty‐four (41%) participants failed to complete their PEP course for any reason. The Odds Ratio (OR) for PEP non‐completion at day 28 in each antiretroviral compared to LPV/r was: ATV 0.95 (95% CI 0.58–1.56; EVG/c: OR 0.65 95% CI 0.30–1.37; RAL: OR 0.68 95% CI 0.41–1.13; and MVC: OR 0.69 95% CI 0.47–1.01. In addition, the rankogram showed that EVG/c had the highest probability of being the best treatment for the lowest rates in PEP non‐completion at day 28, switching, lost to follow‐up or adverse events and MVC for PEP discontinuations due to adverse events. / Conclusions: Our study shows the advantages of integrase inhibitors when used as PEP, particularly EVG as a Single‐Tablet Regimen