Zidovudine 300mg / Lamivudine 150mg 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 Zidovudine + Lamivudine
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.
7 branded products available
MHRA licensed products
View all licensed products for Zidovudine + Lamivudine on the MHRA register
Combivir 150mg/300mg tablets
Zidovudine 300mg / Lamivudine 150mg tablets
Zidovudine 300mg / Lamivudine 150mg tablets
This is the NHS Drug Tariff indicative price used for reimbursement purposes. It may not reflect the price paid by patients or pharmacies.
View full Drug TariffSource: NHS Drug Tariff via NHSBSA. Derived from dm+d VMPP (Virtual Medicinal Product Pack) pricing data. Contains public sector information licensed under the Open Government Licence v3.0.
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
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: 6 · Randomised trials: 20 · 1988–2026
Showing the 50 most relevant studies, sorted by most relevant.
G. Pialoux, F. Raffi, F. Brun-Vézinet, et al.
The New England journal of medicine, 1998
Nathan Shaffer, Rutt Chuachoowong, Philip A Mock, et al.
The Lancet, 1999
The Lancet, 2002
Cowdell I, Beck K, Hey M, et al.
2025
- Pregnancy Complications, Infectious
- HIV Infections
- Reverse Transcriptase Inhibitors
BackgroundThe WHO recommends antiretroviral therapy (ART) containing two nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors (NRTIs) as backbone. WHO recommends tenofovir disoproxil fumarate combined with lamivudine or emtricitabine as first line in pregnancy, and zidovudine, abacavir or tenofovir alafenamide, combined with lamivudine or emtricitabine, as alternatives.ObjectivesThis study aims to evaluate the risk of adverse perinatal outcomes in pregnant women living with HIV (WLHIV) receiving different NRTIs.MethodsData sources included Medline, CINAHL, Global Health, and Embase.Study eligibility criteriaCohort studies.ParticipantsPregnant WLHIV.InterventionsART regimens containing different NRTI drugs.Assessment of risk of biasNewcastle-Ottawa Scale and Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation.Methods of data synthesisRandom-effects meta-analysis.ResultsIn total, 22 cohort studies including 124,478 pregnant WLHIV met the eligibility criteria. ART containing tenofovir disoproxil fumarate was associated with lower risk of preterm birth (risk ratio, 0.89; 95% CI, 0.81-0.97), very preterm birth (0.58; 0.40-0.86), small for gestational age (0.76; 0.59-0.98), very small for gestational age (0.60; 0.48-0.73), stillbirth (0.49; 0.31-0.78), and neonatal death (0.61; 0.40-0.93), compared with ART not containing tenofovir disoproxil fumarate. ART containing zidovudine was associated with an increased risk of very preterm birth (1.59; 1.01-2.49), small for gestational age (1.33; 1.03-1.70), very small for gestational age (1.63; 1.25-2.13), stillbirth (2.23; 1.10-4.55), and neonatal death (1.65; 1.08-2.52), compared with ART not containing zidovudine. For ART regimens also containing either lamivudine or emtricitabine, zidovudine was associated with an increased risk of very preterm birth (1.62; 1.04-2.52), small for gestational age (1.52; 1.28-1.82), very small for gestational age (1.68; 1.36-2.06), stillbirth (2.19; 1.03-4.67), and neonatal death (1.65; 1.08-2.52), compared with ART containing tenofovir disoproxil fumarate. Abacavir was not associated with adverse perinatal outcomes. Tenofovir alafenamide was not associated with low birthweight compared with tenofovir disoproxil fumarate.ConclusionsTenofovir disoproxil fumarate is associated with a lower risk of adverse perinatal outcomes, whereas zidovudine is associated with an increased risk of perinatal outcomes. Abacavir is not associated with adverse perinatal outcomes. Our findings support current WHO guidelines.
Abstract licence: CC BY
Zhang X, Chen J, Fang Y, et al.
2026
- Hepatitis B
- HIV Infections
- Benzoxazines
ObjectiveTo evaluate the efficacy and safety of antiretroviral therapy(ART) regimens based on tenofovir(TDF) + lamivudine(3TC) + efavirenz(EFV) in patients co-infected with Human Immunodeficiency Virus (HIV) and Hepatitis B Virus (HBV), thereby providing evidence-based support for clinical treatment decision-making.MethodsRelevant studies published from database inception to March 2025 were systematically retrieved from the CNKI, Wanfang, VIP, SinoMed, PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library databases. The revised Risk of Bias tool version 2 (ROB2) was used to assess study quality, and all meta-analyses were performed using Stata 18 software.ResultsA total of 31 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) involving 2124 participants and 12 treatment interventions were included, with four outcome measures evaluated. The network meta-analysis demonstrated that the TDF + 3TC + EFV triple therapy regimen was superior to the other evaluated regimens in achieving higher HBV DNA and HIV RNA negative conversion rates. In addition, TDF+ 3TC + EFV demonstrated greater efficacy than zidovudine(AZT) + 3TC + EFV in increasing CD4 + lymphocyte counts. The surface under the cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA) analysis indicated that TDF + 3TC + EFV ranked highest in terms of efficacy. Regarding safety, several studies reported various types of adverse events. However, no statistically significant differences were observed among the treatment groups.ConclusionBased on the currently available evidence, this network meta-analysis suggests that the TDF + 3TC + EFV triple regimen demonstrates superior efficacy across multiple outcome measures in patients with HIV/HBV co-infection. Nevertheless, owing to the inherent limitations of the included studies, further high-quality studies are required to confirm its role as a preferred therapeutic option.
Abstract licence: CC BY-NC-ND
D. Podzamczer, E. Ferrer, E. Consiglio, et al.
Antiviral Therapy, 2001
MartinS Hirsch, R. Steigbigel, S. Staszewski, et al.
The Journal of infectious diseases, 1999
Alzate Angel JC, Duque Molina MM, García García HI
2017
- HIV Infections
- Lamivudine
- Dideoxynucleosides
IntroductionInitial treatment of the HIV is based on the use of three drugs, two of which are nucleoside analog reverse-transcriptase inhibitors. There are three combinations of these drugs which have been approved by different guidelines, each with divergent results in terms of efficacy and safety.ObjectiveTo compare the efficacy and safety of these three combinations.MethodsSystematic review and network meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials comparing fixed doses of Tenofovir Disoproxil Fumarate / Emtricitabine (TDF/FTC), Abacavir / Lamivudine (ABC/3TC) and Zidovudine / Lamivudine (ZDV/3TC).ResultsSeven clinical trials met the eligibility criteria. The results suggested higher efficacy with TDF/FTC vs. ABC/3TC at 96 weeks and vs. ZDV/3TC at 48 weeks. However, there is clinical and statistical heterogeneity. Subgroup analysis were performed by third drug and by level of viral load prior to treatment, and found no differences in virological control. Network meta-analysis could only be carried out with TDF/FTC vs. ZDV/3TC, and the proportion of patients with virological response, with no differences at 48 weeks nor at 96 weeks. Direct comparisons showed an increased risk of bone marrow suppression of ZDV/3TC vs. TDF/FTC and of ABC/3TC hypersensitivity reactions vs. ZDV/3TC.ConclusionsThe results did not show differences in effectiveness among the interventions. However, due to the heterogeneity of the third drug and the follow-up time between the included studies, this result is not definitive. The results raise the need for further studies to help improve treatment recommendations in patients infected with HIV.
Abstract licence: CC BY-NC-ND
Nicholas I. Paton, J. Musaazi, C. Kityo, et al.
The lancet. HIV, 2022
Heje KB, Lindhardt MS, Meddis A, et al.
2025
- HIV Infections
- Body Weight
- Heterocyclic Compounds, 3-Ring
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.