The New England Journal of Medicine July 24, 2024

Twice-Yearly Lenacapavir or Daily F/TAF for HIV Prevention in Cisgender Women (PURPOSE 1)

Linda-Gail Bekker, Moupali Das, Quarraisha Abdool Karim, et al. (PURPOSE 1 Study Team)

Bottom Line

In a landmark phase 3 trial involving cisgender women in sub-Saharan Africa, twice-yearly subcutaneous lenacapavir was 100% efficacious for HIV preexposure prophylaxis (PrEP), demonstrating zero incident HIV infections and overwhelming superiority over both background incidence and daily oral F/TDF.

Key Findings

1. Among 5,338 initially HIV-negative participants, there were 0 incident HIV infections observed among the 2,134 participants in the lenacapavir group (incidence 0 per 100 person-years; 95% CI, 0.00 to 0.19) [1.2.2].
2. In the active comparator arms, there were 39 HIV infections among 2,136 participants in the F/TAF group (2.02 per 100 person-years; 95% CI, 1.44 to 2.76) and 16 infections among 1,068 participants in the F/TDF group (1.69 per 100 person-years; 95% CI, 0.96 to 2.74).
3. Background HIV incidence in the screened population of 8,094 participants was estimated at 2.41 per 100 person-years (95% CI, 1.82 to 3.19).
4. Lenacapavir was significantly superior to both the estimated background HIV incidence (P<0.001) and to daily oral F/TDF (P<0.001) for HIV prevention.
5. Injection-site reactions (such as nodules and erythema) were common but well-tolerated, very rarely leading to treatment discontinuation.

Study Design

Design
Phase 3 RCT
Double-Blind
Sample
5,338
Patients
Duration
Interim analysis
Median
Setting
South Africa, Uganda
Population Cisgender adolescent girls and young women (ages 16-25) at high risk for HIV infection
Intervention Subcutaneous lenacapavir every 26 weeks
Comparator Daily oral emtricitabine-tenofovir alafenamide (F/TAF) or daily oral emtricitabine-tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (F/TDF)
Outcome Incidence of HIV infection compared to estimated background incidence and relative efficacy compared to F/TDF

Study Limitations

The relative superiority of lenacapavir over daily oral F/TDF and F/TAF is partially driven by predictably poor adherence to daily pills in this demographic, which complicates direct pharmacological efficacy comparisons.
Injection-site reactions, particularly subcutaneous nodules, were frequent.
Potential risk of atypical seroconversion (Long-Acting Early Viral Inhibition, LEVI) masking acute infection and complicating standard HIV testing algorithms if breakthrough infections occur (though none occurred in the lenacapavir arm of this trial).
Pricing, implementation logistics, and access in low- and middle-income countries remain massive systemic hurdles for translating these extraordinary trial results into global public health impact.

Clinical Significance

PURPOSE-1 is a paradigm-shifting trial that establishes twice-yearly lenacapavir as a highly potent, remarkably convenient PrEP option. By completely overcoming the behavioral barrier of daily pill adherence—a factor that has severely limited the real-world effectiveness of oral PrEP in adolescent girls and young women—lenacapavir has the potential to drastically alter the trajectory of the global HIV epidemic, provided there is equitable global access and rapid rollout.

Historical Context

Since the FDA approval of daily oral F/TDF for PrEP in 2012, uptake and adherence among cisgender women—who account for a disproportionate share of global HIV infections, particularly in sub-Saharan Africa—have remained profoundly limited due to structural barriers, stigma, and the difficulty of daily pill-taking. The HPTN 084 trial previously demonstrated the superiority of an every-2-month injectable (cabotegravir) over oral PrEP, validating the long-acting injectable approach. PURPOSE-1 extends this paradigm significantly with lenacapavir, a novel multistage HIV-1 capsid inhibitor with an ultra-long pharmacokinetic profile that enables unparalleled twice-yearly dosing.

Guided Discussion

High-yield insights from every perspective

Med Student
Medical Student

Lenacapavir is a novel agent for HIV prevention. How does its mechanism of action differ fundamentally from traditional oral PrEP agents like emtricitabine/tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (F/TDF), and why does this allow for its unique twice-yearly dosing schedule?

Key Response

This tests foundational knowledge of the viral life cycle and pharmacology. Traditional PrEP agents like F/TDF are nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors (NRTIs) that halt viral DNA synthesis. Lenacapavir is a first-in-class capsid inhibitor that disrupts multiple stages of the viral life cycle, including nuclear entry and virion assembly. Its unique chemical structure and low aqueous solubility allow it to form a slow-release depot when injected subcutaneously, enabling ultra-long-acting twice-yearly dosing.

Resident
Resident

Given the 100% efficacy of twice-yearly lenacapavir in the PURPOSE 1 trial, what are the primary clinical indications, adverse effects, and practical follow-up considerations when counseling a high-risk cisgender woman deciding between lenacapavir and daily oral F/TDF?

Key Response

Residents must translate trial efficacy into clinical practice. While efficacy is superior due to guaranteed adherence over 6 months, residents must counsel patients on practical aspects such as injection site reactions (nodules, pain), the necessity of reliable 6-month clinic follow-ups, and the critical importance of not missing a dose to avoid the pharmacokinetic 'tail' period where subtherapeutic drug levels could select for viral resistance if an exposure occurs.

Fellow
Fellow

The pharmacokinetic 'tail' of long-acting injectables like lenacapavir poses a theoretical risk for incident HIV with selected resistance if dosing is delayed or discontinued. How should breakthrough infections be monitored and managed to prevent the emergence of capsid inhibitor-resistant strains?

Key Response

Fellows should grasp advanced PK/PD and resistance mechanisms. Lenacapavir's long half-life means subtherapeutic levels persist for months after the last dose. A breakthrough infection during this period could select for resistance, compromising lenacapavir as a future therapeutic option. Monitoring requires sensitive HIV RNA assays rather than just standard antibody testing, and rapid transition to a fully suppressive, non-cross-resistant ART regimen is crucial if infection occurs.

Attending
Attending

The PURPOSE 1 trial demonstrated overwhelming superiority of lenacapavir over daily oral PrEP, primarily driven by adherence challenges with daily pills. As a clinic director, how do you foresee integrating this twice-yearly injection into existing healthcare delivery models, and what systemic barriers must be overcome to ensure equitable access?

Key Response

Attendings focus on systems-based practice and implementation. The scientific victory of 100% efficacy is clear, but real-world implementation requires addressing high medication costs, establishing clinic infrastructure for subcutaneous depot injections, maintaining patient tracking for semi-annual visits, and proactively dismantling disparities so that marginalized populations are not restricted to oral options while wealthier populations access injectables.

Scholarly Review

Critical appraisal through the lens of expert reviewers and guideline development

PhD
PhD

PURPOSE 1 utilized a recent HIV infection incidence counterfactual (background incidence) rather than a pure placebo group due to ethical constraints of withholding proven PrEP. What are the methodological strengths and limitations of this counterfactual approach, and how does it impact the causal inference of the superiority finding?

Key Response

PhDs must analyze complex trial architectures. Using a Recency Assay-derived background incidence is ethically mandatory but introduces strong assumptions about the comparability of the counterfactual cohort to the trial cohort. Methodological limitations include potential confounding by temporal trends in community transmission and the Hawthorne effect, where trial participation itself alters sexual behavior, potentially skewing the baseline risk estimate and the exact magnitude of the calculated effect size.

Journal Editor
Journal Editor

The Data and Safety Monitoring Board halted the blinded phase of PURPOSE 1 early due to overwhelming efficacy. As an editor reviewing this manuscript, what specific data would you demand regarding adherence metrics in the active control (F/TDF and F/TAF) arms to ensure the superiority claim reflects a true pharmacological breakthrough rather than merely a failure of adherence in the comparator groups?

Key Response

Editors scrutinize claims of 'superiority.' In PrEP trials involving young African women, adherence to daily oral pills is historically poor. If the oral arms in PURPOSE 1 had near-zero adherence, lenacapavir is functionally being compared to placebo. An editor would flag the need for objective adherence markers (e.g., intracellular tenofovir diphosphate levels) to clarify whether the trial proves lenacapavir's pharmacological superiority or simply confirms the massive adherence advantage of a semi-annual injectable.

Guideline Committee
Guideline Committee

Current WHO guidelines recommend daily oral PrEP as the standard, with long-acting cabotegravir (CAB-LA) recently added as an alternative. Based on PURPOSE 1 demonstrating zero infections, what level of evidence does this provide, and what specific criteria (e.g., cost-effectiveness, programmatic feasibility) must be met before guidelines elevate twice-yearly lenacapavir to a preferred, Tier 1 global PrEP recommendation?

Key Response

Guideline developers must weigh efficacy against cost and feasibility. The evidence for lenacapavir's efficacy is high quality (Grade A). However, to update guidelines like the WHO consolidated guidelines on HIV prevention, the committee must evaluate real-world feasibility, generic licensing agreements for low-and-middle-income countries, supply chain requirements, and cost-effectiveness modeling comparing twice-yearly lenacapavir to cheaper, generic daily F/TDF and every-two-month CAB-LA.

Clinical Landscape

Noteworthy Related Trials

2012

Partners PrEP Trial

n = 4,747 · NEJM

Tested

Daily oral TDF or TDF/FTC

Population

HIV-1 serodiscordant heterosexual couples

Comparator

Placebo

Endpoint

Incident HIV infections

Key result: Daily oral TDF and TDF/FTC reduced the risk of HIV acquisition by 67 percent and 75 percent, respectively, among heterosexual participants.
2020

HPTN 084 Trial

n = 3,224 · Lancet

Tested

Long-acting injectable cabotegravir every 8 weeks

Population

Cisgender women at high risk for HIV

Comparator

Daily oral TDF/FTC

Endpoint

Incident HIV infections

Key result: Injectable cabotegravir was 89 percent more effective than daily oral TDF/FTC in preventing HIV acquisition in cisgender women.
2020

DISCOVER Trial

n = 5,387 · Lancet

Tested

Daily oral F/TAF

Population

Men who have sex with men and transgender women at risk for HIV

Comparator

Daily oral F/TDF

Endpoint

Incident HIV infections

Key result: Daily F/TAF was non-inferior to F/TDF for HIV prevention and demonstrated improved bone and renal safety profiles.

Tailored to your role

Want this tailored to you?

Add your specialty or training stage to get role-specific takeaways and more questions.

Personalize this analysis