Study of Lenacapavir for HIV Pre-Exposure Prophylaxis in People Who Are at Risk for HIV Infection

Primary Outcome Measures

1. Incidence Phase: Recent Infection Testing Algorithm (RITA) Estimate of the Background Human Immunodeficiency-1 Virus Infection Incidence Rate (bHIV) Per 100 Person Years (PY)
   bHIV per 100 PY in the Incidence Phase was calculated using RITA. The RITA incorporated HIV-1 testing results and recency assay testing results to estimate the bHIV. Recency assay testing was performed for participants in the All Screened Set found to have HIV-1 infection at the Incidence Phase Screening Visit as defined below. Participants were considered to have recent HIV-1 infection if the normalized optical density (ODn) was below 1.5 threshold using the Sedia limiting antigen avidity enzyme immunoassay (LAg-EIA) and the HIV-1 RNA (viral load) was \> 75 copies/mL of blood. HIV-1 infection was defined as participants having at least one of the following central lab results at the Incidence Phase screening visit: * Positive HIV-1/2 differentiation Ab, OR * Positive HIV-1 ribonucleic acid (RNA) qualitative test, OR * HIV-1 RNA quantitative test ≥200 copies/mL.
2. Randomized Blinded Phase: HIV-1 Incidence Reported Per 100 PY for LEN Compared to Background HIV (bHIV, Participants in All Screened Set)
   HIV-1 incidence per 100 PY for LEN was calculated as the number of participants who acquired HIV-1 divided by the total of a) for participants not diagnosed with HIV-1, sum of all duration of follow-up time in years, while at risk of HIV-1 infection (where a year is 365.25 days) and b) for participants diagnosed with HIV-1, sum of all duration of follow-up time up to confirmed HIV-1 diagnoses. HIV-1 diagnosis was determined by an HIV adjudication committee who reviewed potential HIV-1 infection events in the randomized participants. The committee, in a blinded, consistent, and unbiased manner, determined whether HIV test results confirmed HIV-1 infection and determined the date of diagnosis for each case, defined as the date of the earliest study visit with evidence of HIV infection considering both prospective HIV testing and back-testing of archived samples. bHIV incidence per 100 PY in All Screened Set was estimated as described in outcome measure#1.

Secondary Outcome Measures

1. Randomized Blinded Phase: HIV-1 Incidence Reported Per 100 PY for LEN Compared to F/TDF
   HIV-1 incidence per 100 PY was calculated as the number of participants who acquired HIV-1 divided by the total of a) for participants not diagnosed with HIV-1, sum of all duration of follow-up time in years, while at risk of HIV-1 infection (where a year is 365.25 days) and b) for participants diagnosed with HIV-1, sum of all duration of follow-up time up to confirmed HIV-1 diagnoses. HIV-1 diagnosis was determined by an HIV adjudication committee who reviewed potential HIV-1 infection events in the randomized participants. The committee, in a blinded, consistent, and unbiased manner, determined whether HIV test results confirmed HIV-1 infection and determined the date of diagnosis for each case, defined as the date of the earliest study visit with evidence of HIV infection considering both prospective HIV testing and back-testing of archived samples.
2. Randomized Blinded Phase: HIV-1 Incidence Among Participants Adherent to LEN
   A participant was defined as adherent to LEN if they have received all per-protocol administrations of LEN within 28 weeks since the previous administration. The incidence of HIV-1 infection per 100 PY calculation is defined in outcome measure #2.
3. Percentage of Participants Experiencing Treatment-Emergent Adverse Events (TEAEs)
   TEAEs were defined as 1 or both of the following: Any adverse events (AEs) leading to premature discontinuation of study drug, or Any AEs with an onset date on or after the study drug start date and no later than the last exposure date after permanent discontinuation of the study drug. An AE was any untoward medical occurrence in a clinical study participant administered a study drug that did not necessarily have a causal relationship with the treatment.
4. Percentage of Participants Experiencing Clinically Significant Laboratory Abnormalities
   Treatment-emergent laboratory abnormalities were defined as values that increased at least 1 toxicity grade from baseline at any post-baseline visit, up to and including the last exposure date for participants who permanently discontinued study drug, or the last available date in the database snapshot for participants who were still on treatment at the time of an analysis.