AttendMe Owl Logo
AttendMe
Evidence Evolution
Infectious DiseaseInfectious Disease

How This Evidence Evolved

HIV PrEP Revolution

From daily pills to twice-yearly shots

2010-202411.1

Timeline

Tenofovir-based
2005
iPrEx
2010
Partners PrEP
2012
HPTN 083
2021
CDC PrEP Guidelines
2021
WHO PrEP Recommendations
2022
PURPOSE 1
2024
Trial
Guideline
Approval
Meta-analysis
Signal

Early observations and pilot data that first suggested a new direction

Prior to PrEP, HIV prevention relied almost exclusively on behavioral interventions, condom use, and post-exposure prophylaxis. The concept of pre-exposure prophylaxis emerged from animal studies showing that tenofovir-based regimens could prevent simian immunodeficiency virus acquisition in macaques. These preclinical findings, combined with the success of antiretroviral therapy in preventing mother-to-child transmission and the biological plausibility of mucosal drug concentrations preventing viral establishment, provided the rationale for human efficacy trials. The stage was set for a paradigm shift from reactive to proactive HIV prevention.
Proof

Landmark RCTs and pivotal trials that established the evidence base

The iPrEx trial was the landmark study that proved PrEP could work in humans. This multinational RCT randomized 2499 high-risk MSM and transgender women to daily oral TDF/FTC (tenofovir/emtricitabine) vs placebo, demonstrating a 44% overall reduction in HIV acquisition. Critically, among participants with detectable drug levels (indicating adherence), efficacy exceeded 90%. The Partners PrEP study in serodiscordant heterosexual couples in Kenya and Uganda showed 75% efficacy with TDF/FTC and 67% with TDF alone. These studies established that daily oral PrEP was highly effective when taken consistently, leading to FDA approval of Truvada for PrEP in 2012, the first biomedical HIV prevention intervention beyond barrier methods.
Extension

Follow-up studies, subgroup analyses, and real-world validation

The evolution from daily pills to long-acting injectables represented the next breakthrough. The HPTN 083 trial demonstrated that injectable cabotegravir (CAB-LA) every 2 months was superior to daily oral TDF/FTC in MSM and transgender women, with 69% greater protection. HPTN 084 confirmed superiority in cisgender women in sub-Saharan Africa. The most dramatic advance came with lenacapavir, a novel capsid inhibitor requiring only twice-yearly subcutaneous injection. The PURPOSE 1 trial in women and adolescent girls in South Africa and Uganda showed zero HIV infections among 2134 participants receiving lenacapavir, compared to a background incidence of 2.41/100 person-years, achieving 100% efficacy. This result was unprecedented in HIV prevention research.
Guidelines

Integration into clinical practice guidelines and recommendations

CDC PrEP guidelines have been updated multiple times to reflect the expanding evidence. The 2021 update recommended PrEP for all individuals at substantial risk of HIV, including MSM, heterosexual persons with HIV-positive partners, people who inject drugs, and those with recent STI diagnoses. Following CAB-LA approval in 2021, injectable PrEP was added as an option. WHO prequalification of CAB-LA in 2022 opened access in low- and middle-income countries. The integration of PrEP into routine primary care, rather than specialist HIV services, has become a key implementation goal.
CDC US Public Health Service PrEP Clinical Practice Guideline

Offer PrEP to all individuals at substantial risk of HIV; daily oral TDF/FTC or TAF/FTC, or injectable CAB-LA every 2 months as options

WHO PrEP Recommendations

Oral PrEP and injectable CAB-LA both recommended as PrEP options; choice based on individual preference, access, and adherence considerations

Now

Current standard of care and ongoing research directions

The PrEP landscape is rapidly evolving toward long-acting options that address the Achilles heel of daily oral PrEP: adherence. Lenacapavir, requiring only twice-yearly injection, is pending regulatory approval for PrEP after the stunning PURPOSE 1 results. If approved, it could transform HIV prevention in high-burden settings where daily pill-taking and bimonthly clinic visits are barriers. Challenges remain around cost, access equity, and ensuring that long-acting PrEP reaches the populations at highest risk, particularly young women in sub-Saharan Africa. Research continues on PrEP implants, broadly neutralizing antibodies, and combination prevention strategies that could ultimately make HIV elimination achievable.

Landmark Trials in This Story

Explore the evidence yourself

Ask AttendMe about any trial, guideline, or clinical question. Evidence-ranked answers from 3M+ peer-reviewed articles.

Related Evidence

Frequently Asked Questions

How effective is PrEP when taken consistently?+
When adherence is high, daily oral PrEP reduces HIV acquisition risk by over 99% in MSM and over 90% in heterosexual transmission. Injectable CAB-LA showed 69% superiority over daily oral PrEP in clinical trials. Lenacapavir achieved 100% efficacy in the PURPOSE 1 trial with zero infections among recipients.
What is the advantage of long-acting injectable PrEP over daily pills?+
Long-acting PrEP removes the daily adherence burden, which is the primary reason oral PrEP fails in real-world settings. CAB-LA requires injection only every 2 months, and lenacapavir only every 6 months. This is particularly important for young people, those facing stigma, and individuals in settings where daily pill-taking is impractical or conspicuous.
Who should be offered PrEP?+
CDC guidelines recommend offering PrEP to anyone at substantial risk of HIV, including: MSM with inconsistent condom use or recent STI, heterosexual individuals with HIV-positive partners or multiple partners in high-prevalence areas, people who inject drugs and share equipment, and anyone who requests PrEP based on their own risk assessment.

Medical Disclaimer: This content is for educational purposes only and does not constitute medical advice. Clinical decisions should always be based on individual patient assessment, local guidelines, and professional judgement.

All data sourced from published, peer-reviewed articles and clinical practice guidelines.

Last reviewed: 3 April 2026