Darunavir 800mg / Cobicistat 150mg / Emtricitabine 200mg / Tenofovir alafenamide 10mg tablets
Requires a prescription from a doctor or prescriber
Official documents, adverse reaction reporting, and safety monitoring
Report a side effect
Submit a Yellow Card report to the MHRA
Official medicine documents
Yellow Card
Report side effects (MHRA)
Drug safety updates
MHRA alerts for Darunavir + Cobicistat + Emtricitabine + Tenofovir alafenamide
Safety monitoring data
Yellow Card reports
The MHRA Yellow Card scheme collects reports of suspected side effects from healthcare professionals and patients. View the Drug Analysis Profile (iDAP) for real-world adverse reaction data.
View Drug Analysis Profile
Browse all Drug Analysis Profiles A–Z
Browse all iDAP reports
Interactive Drug Analysis Profiles for all medicines
Report a side effect
Submit a Yellow Card report to the MHRA
Data from the MHRA Yellow Card scheme. A reported reaction does not necessarily mean the medicine caused it. Contains public sector information licensed under the Open Government Licence v3.0.
EudraVigilance
The European Medicines Agency (EMA) collects suspected adverse reaction reports from across the EU/EEA through the EudraVigilance system. Search for safety data on this medicine.
Search EudraVigilance database
Browse substances A–Z in the European adverse reaction database
About EudraVigilance
Learn about EU pharmacovigilance and safety monitoring
EudraVigilance data is published by the European Medicines Agency (EMA). A suspected adverse reaction is not necessarily caused by the medicine.
1 branded products available
MHRA licensed products
View all licensed products for Darunavir + Cobicistat + Emtricitabine + Tenofovir alafenamide on the MHRA register
Symtuza 800mg/150mg/200mg/10mg tablets
Therapeutically similar medicines
Similarity is based on WHO Anatomical Therapeutic Chemical (ATC) classification and on a factual NHS dm+d therapeutic-grouping code prefix. Source data: NHS dm+d via TRUD (OGL v3.0), WHO ATC/DDD Index.
NHS prescribing volume and spending trends
Guidelines from the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence
NICE clinical guidance(1)
Source: National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE). Contains public sector information licensed under the Open Government Licence v3.0.
Check stock at pharmacies and supply information
Pharmacy stock checkers
Search for this medicine at major UK pharmacy chains. These links open the retailer's own website — results depend on their current online catalogue.
Supply & safety information
Official UK regulator monitoring and safety alerts
Pharmacy links redirect to the retailer's own search and do not represent real-time stock levels. Shortage and safety information sourced from MHRA drug safety updates (gov.uk, Crown Copyright under OGL v3.0).
Codes for healthcare professionals and prescribing systems
These codes are used by healthcare IT systems and prescribers to identify this medicine.
NHS UK identifiers
Browse tools
SNOMED CT and dm+d codes from NHS TRUD (Technology Reference data Update Distribution), licensed under the Open Government Licence v3.0. ATC codes from the WHO Collaborating Centre for Drug Statistics Methodology (whocc.no).
Active and completed clinical studies from ClinicalTrials.gov
Source: ClinicalTrials.gov, a database of the U.S. National Library of Medicine (NLM), National Institutes of Health (NIH). Data accessed via ClinicalTrials.gov API v2. Trial information is provided for research purposes and does not constitute medical advice.
Academic studies and reviews for this medicine's active substance
Showing the 50 most relevant studies.
Reviews & meta-analyses: 14 · Randomised trials: 10 · 2000–2026
Showing the 50 most relevant studies, sorted by most relevant.
Joel E. Gallant
JAMA, 2004
Tan DHS, Hull MW, Onyegbule SO, et al.
2025
- HIV Infections
- Anti-HIV Agents
- Post-Exposure Prophylaxis
BackgroundNew HIV infections occur annually in Canada, highlighting the need for pre- and postexposure prophylaxis (PrEP and PEP). Through the Canadian Institutes of Health Research (CIHR) Pan-Canadian Network for HIV/AIDS and STBBI (sexually transmitted and blood-borne infections) Clinical Trials Research, we have updated the 2017 guideline on clinical indications and drug regimens for PrEP and PEP in Canada.MethodsDrawing on meetings with community-based organizations representing key populations affected by HIV in Canada, along with evidence from 3 systematic reviews on PrEP, PEP, and HIV risk assessment tools (searches to June 2024), our diverse panel of 19 experts formulated recommendations on PrEP and PEP. We used a formal evidence-to-decision-making framework and the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation system. We followed the Guidelines International Network principles for managing competing interests. Our guideline development and reporting adhere with Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation II.RecommendationsThis guideline contains 31 recommendations and 10 good practice statements. Although it is appropriate to prescribe PrEP to adults and adolescents who request it, clinicians are also encouraged to assess HIV risk during routine health visits to identify people who would benefit from PrEP. Clinicians should elicit information about patients' anatomy and sexual partners in a culturally sensitive and affirming manner to determine which PrEP regimens - daily oral tenofovir disoproxil fumarate/emtricitabine (TDF/FTC), on-demand TDF/FTC, daily oral tenofovir alafenamide/emtricitabine, or long-acting injectable cabotegravir - are suitable options. When assessing whether PEP is needed, clinicians should consider the likelihood that the source person has transmissible HIV, as well as the biological risk of HIV transmission based on exposure type. Preferred PEP regimens are dolutegravir plus TDF/FTC, or bictegravir/tenofovir alafenamide/emtricitabine.InterpretationMultiple safe, effective PrEP and PEP regimens are now available in Canada, making it increasingly possible to find suitable options for all who could benefit. Implementation of this guideline should expand access to biomedical HIV prevention interventions for those at risk and decrease the incidence of HIV in Canada.
Abstract licence: CC BY-NC-ND
Ghosn J, Chow J, Gandhi M, et al.
2025
- HIV Infections
- Adenine
- Anti-HIV Agents
BackgroundTreatment guidelines recommend rapid antiretroviral therapy (ART) initiation among eligible people with HIV to improve treatment outcomes and reduce HIV transmission. Bictegravir/emtricitabine/tenofovir alafenamide (B/F/TAF), an integrase strand transfer inhibitor-based single-tablet regimen, is recommended for rapid start in US and European guidelines. This systematic literature review synthesized evidence on the efficacy, safety and effect on patient-reported outcomes (PROs) of B/F/TAF rapid start among newly diagnosed people with HIV.MethodsMEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials databases were searched in January 2024, supplemented by searches of conference proceedings and clinical trial records. English-language interventional studies of B/F/TAF rapid start among ART-naïve people with HIV reporting efficacy, safety or PROs were eligible. Study quality was assessed using York Centre for Reviews and Dissemination or Risk Of Bias In Non-randomized Studies of Interventions checklists. Results were synthesized narratively.ResultsAcross eight included studies, 745 people with HIV received B/F/TAF rapid start, 171 received rapid start comparators and 255 received non-rapid start comparators. At Weeks 24 and 48, 80%-94% and 74%-96% of people with HIV treated with B/F/TAF rapid start achieved viral load ConclusionsB/F/TAF rapid start was efficacious, safe and associated with high engagement in care and improved PROs.
Abstract licence: CC BY-NC
Rashid I, Unger NR, Willis C, et al.
2025
- HIV Infections
- Pyridones
- HIV Integrase Inhibitors
ObjectiveThis study evaluated rates of treatment-emergent resistance-associated mutations (TE-RAMs) and discontinuation due to adverse events (DC-AEs) across integrase strand transfer inhibitor (INSTI)-based single-tablet regimens and injectable cabotegravir + rilpivirine (CAB + RPV) in virologically suppressed people with HIV.MethodsA systematic literature review was conducted for phase 2-4 randomized controlled trials with ≥48 weeks of follow-up involving virologically suppressed people with HIV aged ≥12 years and published January 2003-March 2024. A random-effects network meta-analysis estimated comparative rates of TE-RAMs and DC-AEs among regimens at 48 weeks. Risk of bias and strength of evidence were assessed using Cochrane RoB and CINeMA, respectively.ResultsFourteen (7509 participants) and nine (4656 participants) studies were included in the TE-RAMs and DC-AEs analyses, respectively. No significant differences in rates of TE-RAMs were observed; risk ratios (RRs) for TE-RAMs for bictegravir/emtricitabine/tenofovir alafenamide (B/F/TAF), dolutegravir/abacavir/lamivudine (DTG/ABC/3TC) and CAB + RPV every 4 weeks (Q4W) versus CAB + RPV every 8 weeks (Q8W) were 0.22 (95% CI, 0.02-2.04), 0.22 (95% CI, 0.00-19.85) and 0.40 (95% CI, 0.14-1.09). Compared with CAB + RPV Q4W and Q8W, DC-AEs were significantly lower with B/F/TAF (RR, 0.15 [95% CI, 0.03-0.75] and RR, 0.16 [95% CI, 0.04-0.67], respectively) and DTG/ABC/3TC (RR, 0.05 [95% CI, 0.01-0.48] and RR, 0.05 [95% CI, 0.01-0.46], respectively).ConclusionsIn virologically suppressed people with HIV, switching to CAB + RPV Q8W yielded a non-significant increased risk of TE-RAMs compared with INSTI-based 2- and 3-drug regimens and CAB + RPV Q4W. Both CAB + RPV Q4W and Q8W had significantly higher risks of DC-AEs than B/F/TAF and DTG/ABC/3TC. Findings highlight the importance of considering both resistance and tolerability when switching regimens.
Abstract licence: CC BY-NC
E. De Clercq
Biochemical pharmacology, 2016
J. Eron, C. Orkin, J. Gallant, et al.
AIDS (London, England), 2018
- HIV-1
- HIV Infections
- Drug Combinations
S. Gallien, M. Massetti, P. Flandre, et al.
HIV Medicine, 2018
Michael S. Saag
JAMA, 2004
G. Huhn, P. Tebas, J. Gallant, et al.
Journal of Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndromes (1999), 2017
Fujie Zhang, Hao Wu, Wei-Ping Cai, et al.
The Lancet Regional Health: Western Pacific, 2024
Summary Background We compared the efficacy and safety profiles of ainuovirine (ANV), a new-generation non-nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor (NNRTI), with boosted elvitegravir (EVG), both coformulated with two nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors (NRTIs), in people living with HIV-1 (PLWH) who had achieved virological suppression on previous NNRTI-based antiretroviral (ARV) regimen. Methods This study was a multi-centre, randomised, double-blind, active-controlled, non-inferiority trial recruiting PLWH from 10 clinical centres across China. Main inclusion criteria included age of 18–65 years (inclusive), and stably staying on an ARV regimen combining an NNRTI with a two-drug NRTI backbone for at least 12 months. Eligible participants must have maintained plasma HIV-1 ribonucleic acid (RNA) titre below 50 copies per mL confirmed on two successive tests at an interval of at least one month prior to randomisation. Participants were randomly assigned to receive ANV 150 mg plus lamivudine (3TC) 300 mg, and tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (TDF) 300 mg (ANV/3TC/TDF), or cobicistat (Cobi) 150 mg boosted EVG plus emtricitabine (FTC) 200 mg, and tenofovir alafenamide (TAF) 10 mg. The primary efficacy endpoint was the proportion of participants with HIV-1 RNA titre at 50 copies per mL or above at week 48 using the US Food and Drug Administration snapshot algorithm, with a non-inferiority margin of 4 percentage points at a two-side 95% confidence level. This trial is active, but not recruiting, and is registered with Chinese Clinical Trial Registry (ChiCTR), number ChiCTR2100051605. Findings Between October 2021 and February 2022, 923 patients were screened for eligibility, among whom 762 participants were randomized and had received at least one dose of ANV/3TC/TDF (n = 381) or EVG/Cobi/FTC/TAF (n = 381). At week 48, 7 (1.8%) participants on ANV/3TC/TDF and 6 (1.6%) participants on EVG/Cobi/FTC/TAF had plasma HIV-1 RNA titre at 50 copies per mL or above, including missing virological data within the time window (the Cochran-Mantel-Haenszel method, estimated treatment difference [ETD], 0.3%, 95% CI −1.6 to 2.1), establishing the non-inferiority of ANV/3TC/TDF to EVG/Cobi/FTC/TAF. The proportions of participants experiencing at least one treatment-emergent adverse events (AEs) were comparable between the two arms (97.6% versus 97.6%). A small proportion of participants discontinued study drug due to AEs (0.3% versus 0.3%). Serious AEs occurred in 11 (2.9%) participants on ANV/3TC/TDF and 9 (2.4%) participants on EVG/Cobi/FTC/TAF, respectively, none of which was considered related to study drug at the jurisdiction of the investigator. At week 48, participants on ANV/3TC/TDF showed a significantly less weight gain from baseline compared to those on EVG/Cobi/FTC/TAF (least square mean, 1.16 versus 2.05 kg, ETD −0.90 kg, 95% CI, −1.43 to −0.37). The changes in serum lipids from baseline also favoured ANV/3TC/TDF over EVG/Cobi/FTC/TAF. Interpretation In virologically suppressed PLWH on previous NNRTI-based ARV regimen, switch to ANV/3TC/TDF resulted in less weight gain, and improved lipid metabolism while maintaining virological suppression non-inferior to that to EVG/Cobi/FTC/TAF. Funding Jiangsu Aidea Pharmaceutical & the National “Thirteenth Five-year Period” Major Innovative Drugs Research and Development Key Project of the People's Republic of China Ministry of Science and Technology.
Abstract licence: CC BY-NC-ND
Sources: aggregated from Europe PMC (EMBL-EBI), OpenAlex, Crossref, PubMed and other open scholarly databases. Retracted articles are excluded. Study information is provided for research purposes and does not constitute medical advice.
Scientific data (pharmacology, interactions, ADME) is not yet available for this medicine. Clinical sections are sourced from the NHS dm+d database.