A participant was classified as a responder at the first of 2 consecutive visits with plasma HIV-1 RNA levels below 40 copies/mL. The participant continued to be a responder until one of the following: the participant had 2 consecutive values greater than or equal to 40 copies/mL; the final measurement, if the final measurement was the first one documenting an increase in plasma HIV-1 RNA level to greater than or equal to 40 copies/mL; the participant discontinued participation in the study or died.

Intent to treat (ITT) population, defined as all randomized participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug.

Treatment-emergent adverse events were defined as those occurring after study drug initiation and within 30 days after the last dose of study drug. Treatment-emergent, moderate or severe drug-related adverse events that occurred in at least 2% of participants in either treatment arm are presented.

Intent to treat (ITT) population, defined as all randomized participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug.

A participant was classified as a responder at the first of 2 consecutive visits with plasma HIV-1 RNA levels below 40 copies/mL. The participant continued to be a responder until one of the following: 1) the participant had 2 consecutive values greater than or equal to 40 copies/mL; the final measurement, if the final measurement was the first one documenting an increase in plasma HIV-1 RNA level to greater than or equal to 40 copies/mL; the participant discontinued participation in the study or died.

Intention to treat analysis of all randomized participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug.

Potentially clinically significant laboratory values that occurred in at least 2% of participants in either treatment arm are presented.

All randomized participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug and had at least 1 post-baseline laboratory value.

Participants who had values at Baseline and the visit were included in the analysis of data at that visit. Number of participants in each visit analysis ranged from 98 and 96 participants in the LPV/r+FTC/TDF and LPV/r+RAL groups, respectively, at Week 8, to 80 and 76 participants in the LPV/r+FTC/TDF and LPV/r+RAL groups, respectively, at Week 96.

Time of loss of virologic response was defined as the first of the following: first of 2 consecutive visits with plasma HIV-1 RNA greater than or equal to 40 copies/milliliter (mL), if the participant previously demonstrated 2 consecutive plasma HIV-1 RNA levels below 40 copies/mL; Study Day 1, if the subject never achieved 2 consecutive plasma HIV-1 RNA levels below 40 copies/mL; the day of the final measurement, if the final measurement was the first one documenting an increase in plasma HIV-1 RNA level to greater than or equal to 40 copies/mL.

Intent to treat (ITT) population, defined as all randomized participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug.

Resistance to study drugs was defined as described by the International AIDS Society-USA (IAS-USA) Panel. All participants had an HIV-1 drug resistance genotype (lopinavir/ritonavir, tenofovir, or emtricitabine) obtained at the Screening Visit. Beginning at Week 8, if participant's plasma HIV-1 RNA was greater than or equal to 40 copies/milliliter (mL) and was below 40 copies/mL at the previous visit, additional procedures were undertaken to determine if resistance to study drug occurred.

The population for each group was the number of participants who met the criteria for resistance testing, that is, participants whose HIV-RNA increased from <40 copies/ml to >=40 copies/mL at a later visit and who underwent additional genotyping for resistance to one of the study drugs the participant was receiving.

Beginning at Week 8, if participant's plasma HIV-1 RNA was greater than/equal to 40 copies/milliliter (mL) and was below 40 copies/mL at the previous visit, additional procedures were undertaken to determine if resistance occurred. Evidence of lopinavir resistance was more conservatively defined as the presence of 1 or more of these mutations: protease I47V or A, G48V, I50V, V82A or F or T or S, I84V, L90M; or presence of at least 3 or more of these mutations: protease L10F or I or R or V, K20M or R, L24I, V32I, L33F, M36I, M46I or L, F53L, any change to I54, A71V or T, and G73S.

The population for each group was the number of participants who met the criteria for resistance testing, that is, participants whose HIV-RNA increased from <40 copies/mL to >=40 copies/mL at a later visit and who underwent additional genotyping for resistance to one of the study drugs the participant was receiving.

The Survey is a brief, comprehensive health status measure used in studies of people with HIV/AIDS. Participants rate their health and mental/emotional condition, how much their health limits physical activities (eating, dressing, bathing, climbing stairs, walking one block, etc.) and social activities (for example, visiting with friends or relatives), and other questions that measure quality of life. The physical component summarizes answers to questions about physical status. Possible scores range from 0 to 100. A higher score indicates better health, and increases indicate improvement.

Participants who had values at Baseline and Week 96 were included in the analysis.

The Survey is a brief, comprehensive health status measure used in studies of people with HIV/AIDS. Participants rate their health and mental/emotional condition, how much their health limits physical activities (eating, dressing, bathing, climbing stairs, walking one block, etc.) and social activities (visiting with friends or relatives, etc.), and other questions that measure quality of life. The mental component summarizes answers to questions about emotional and mental wellbeing. Possible scores range from 0 to 100. Higher scores indicates better health, and increases indicate improvement.

Participants who had values at Baseline and Week 96 were included in the analysis.

The Effectiveness Scale of the TSQM evaluates the participant's satisfaction or dissatisfaction (1=extremely dissatisfied to 7=extremely satisfied) with the ability of the medication to prevent or treat the condition, the way the medication relieves symptoms, the amount of time it takes for the medication to start working, and other questions. Scores are converted to a range of 0 to 100. A higher score indicates greater satisfaction.

Participants who had values at Week 96 were included in the analysis.

The Side Effects scale of the TSQM asks if the participant experiences side effects (yes/no), and if so, how bothersome the side effects are, to what extent they interfere with physical health and ability to function (for example, strength and energy levels), to what extent they interfere with mental function (for example, ability to think clearly, stay awake, etc.), and to what extent the side effects affect the participants overall satisfaction with the medication. Scores are converted to a range of 0 to 100. Higher scores indicate less interference and/or less dissatisfaction.

Participants who had values at Week 96 were included in the analysis.

The Global Satisfaction scale of the TSQM evaluates the participants rating of whether the good things about the medication outweigh the bad things (1=not at all certain to 5=extremely certain) and how satisfied or dissatisfied the participant is with the medication (1=extremely dissatisfied to 7=extremely satisfied). Scores are converted to a range of 0 to 100. Higher scores indicate greater satisfaction.

Participants who had values at Week 96 were included in the analysis.

Participants who had values at Baseline and Week 96 were included in the analysis.

Hematocrit fraction is the percentage (%) by volume of packed red blood cells (RBCs) in the participant's blood. It was measured using standard clinical laboratory analysis of participants' blood samples.

Participants who had values at Baseline and Week 96 were included in the analysis.

Participants who had values at Baseline and Week 96 were included in the analysis.

Participants who had values at Baseline and Week 96 were included in the analysis.

Participants who had values at Baseline and Week 96 were included in the analysis.

Participants who had values at Baseline and Week 96 were included in the analysis.

Participants who had values at Baseline and Week 96 were included in the analysis.

Participants who had values at Baseline and Week 96 were included in the analysis.

Participants who had values at Baseline and Week 96 were included in the analysis.

Participants who had values at Baseline and Week 96 were included in the analysis.

Participants who had values at Baseline and Week 96 were included in the analysis.

Participants who had values at Baseline and Week 96 were included in the analysis.

Participants who had values at Baseline and Week 96 were included in the analysis.

Participants who had values at Baseline and Week 96 were included in the analysis.

Participants who had values at Baseline and Week 96 were included in the analysis.

Participants who had values at Baseline and Week 96 were included in the analysis.

Participants who had values at Baseline and Week 96 were included in the analysis.

Participants who had values at Baseline and Week 96 were included in the analysis.

Participants who had values at Baseline and Week 96 were included in the analysis.

Participants who had values at Baseline and Week 96 were included in the analysis.

Participants who had values at Baseline and Week 96 were included in the analysis.

Participants who had values at Baseline and Week 96 were included in the analysis.

Participants who had values at Baseline and Week 96 were included in the analysis.

Participants who had values at Baseline and Week 96 were included in the analysis.

Participants who had values at Baseline and Week 96 were included in the analysis.

Participants who had values at Baseline and Week 96 were included in the analysis.

Participants who had values at Baseline and Week 96 were included in the analysis.

Included in measures of metabolic toxicity

Participants who had values at Baseline and Week 96 were included in the analysis.

Included in measures of metabolic toxicity

Participants who had values at Baseline and Week 96 were included in the analysis.

Participants who had values for both measures (LDL and HDL) at Baseline and Week 96 are included in the analysis.

Included in measures of metabolic toxicity

Participants who had values at Baseline and Week 96 were included in the analysis.

Participants who had values at Baseline and Week 96 were included in the analysis.

Included in measures of metabolic toxicity

Participants who had values at Baseline and Week 96 were included in the analysis.

Participants who had values at Baseline and Week 96 were included in the analysis.

Included in measures of metabolic toxicity

Participants who had values at Baseline and Week 96 were included in the analysis.

Participants who had values at Baseline and Week 96 were included in the analysis.

Included in measures of metabolic toxicity

Participants who had values at Baseline and Week 96 were included in the analysis.

Included in measures of metabolic toxicity

Participants who had values at Baseline and Week 96 were included in the analysis.

Included in measures of metabolic toxicity

Participants who had values at Baseline and Week 96 were included in the analysis.

Included in measures of metabolic toxicity

Participants who had values at Baseline and Week 96 were included in the analysis.

Included in measures of metabolic toxicity

Participants who had values at Baseline and Week 96 were included in the analysis.

Included in measures of metabolic toxicity

Participants who had values at Baseline and Week 96 were included in the analysis.

Included in measures of metabolic toxicity

Participants who had values at Baseline and Week 96 were included in the analysis.

Urine specific gravity is a laboratory test that measures the concentration of all chemical particles in the urine. The measurement produces a ratio of the urine density to water density.

Participants who had values at Baseline and Week 96 were included in the analysis.

Participants who had values at Baseline and Week 96 were included in the analysis.

Participants who had values at Baseline and Week 96 were included in the analysis.

Participants who had values at Baseline and Week 96 were included in the analysis.

Participants who had values at Baseline and Week 96 were included in the analysis.

Participants who had values at Baseline and Week 96 were included in the analysis.

Participants who had values at Baseline and Week 96 were included in the analysis.

Chest circumference is included in the measures of somatic toxicity, which is characterized by loss of fat in the face, arms, and legs, and increase in fat in the base of the back of the neck and in the abdomen. Participant's chest circumference was measured at 5 cm above the xiphoid process using non-stretchable measuring tape with half centimeter marks.

Participants who had values at Baseline and Week 96 were included in the analysis.

Waist circumference is included in the measures of somatic toxicity, which is characterized by loss of fat in the face, arms, and legs, and increase in fat in the base of the back of the neck and in the abdomen. Circumference of participant's waist was measured at the level of the navel using non-stretchable measuring tape with half centimeter marks.

Participants who had values at Baseline and Week 96 are included in the analysis.

Arm circumference is included in the measures of somatic toxicity, which is characterized by loss of fat in the face, arms, and legs, and increase in fat in the base of the back of the neck and in the abdomen. Particpant's arm circumference was measured halfway between the acromial process on the shoulder and the tip of the elbow (olecranon process) using non-stretchable measuring tape with half centimeter marks.

Participants who had values at Baseline and Week 96 are included in the analysis.

Hip circumference is included in the measures of somatic toxicity, which is characterized by loss of fat in the face, arms, and legs, and increase in fat in the base of the back of the neck and in the abdomen. Participant was measured at widest width of the hip using non-stretchable measuring tape with half centimeter marks.

Participants who had values at Baseline and Week 96 are included in the analysis.

Mid-thigh circumference is included in the measures of somatic toxicity, which is characterized by loss of fat in the face, arms, and legs, and increase in fat in the base of the back of the neck and in the abdomen. Particpant's thigh circumference was measured halfway between the inguinal crease and the midpoint of the upper border of the patella using non-stretchable measuring tape with half centimeter marks.

Participants who had values at Baseline and Week 96 are included in the analysis.

The dual energy X-ray absorptiometry (DEXA) scan is included in the measures of somatic toxicity, which is characterized by loss of fat in the face, arms, and legs, and increase in fat in the base of the back of the neck and in the abdomen.

Participants who had values at Baseline and Week 96 are included in the analysis.

The dual energy X-ray absorptiometry (DEXA) scan is included in the measures of somatic toxicity, which is characterized by loss of fat in the face, arms, and legs, and increase in fat in the base of the back of the neck and in the abdomen.

Participants who had values at Baseline and Week 96 are included in the analysis.

The dual energy X-ray absorptiometry (DEXA) scan is included in the measures of somatic toxicity, which is characterized by loss of fat in the face, arms, and legs, and increase in fat in the base of the back of the neck and in the abdomen.

Participants who had values at Baseline and Week 96 are included in the analysis.

The dual energy X-ray absorptiometry (DEXA) is included in the measures of somatic toxicity, which is characterized by loss of fat in the face, arms, and legs, and increase in fat in the base of the back of the neck and in the abdomen.

Participants who had values at Baseline and Week 96 are included in the analysis.

The dual energy X-ray absorptiometry (DEXA) scan is included in the measures of somatic toxicity, which is characterized by loss of fat in the face, arms, and legs, and increase in fat in the base of the back of the neck and in the abdomen.

Participants who had values at Baseline and Week 96 are included in the analysis.

The dual energy X-ray absorptiometry (DEXA) scan is included in the measures of somatic toxicity, which is characterized by loss of fat in the face, arms, and legs, and increase in fat in the base of the back of the neck and in the abdomen.

Participants who had values at Baseline and Week 96 are included in the analysis.

The dual energy X-ray absorptiometry (DEXA) scan is included in the measures of somatic toxicity, which is characterized by loss of fat in the face, arms, and legs, and increase in fat in the base of the back of the neck and in the abdomen.

Participants who had values at Baseline and Week 96 are included in the analysis.

The dual energy X-ray absorptiometry (DEXA) scan is included in the measures of somatic toxicity, which is characterized by loss of fat in the face, arms, and legs, and increase in fat in the base of the back of the neck and in the abdomen.

Participants who had values at Baseline and Week 96 are included in the analysis.

The dual energy X-ray absorptiometry (DEXA) scan is included in the measures of somatic toxicity, which is characterized by loss of fat in the face, arms, and legs, and increase in fat in the base of the back of the neck and in the abdomen.

Participants who had values at Baseline and Week 96 are included in the analysis.

The dual energy X-ray absorptiometry (DEXA) scan is included in the measures of somatic toxicity, which is characterized by loss of fat in the face, arms, and legs, and increase in fat in the base of the back of the neck and in the abdomen.

Participants who had values at Baseline and Week 96 are included in the analysis.

The dual energy X-ray absorptiometry (DEXA) scan is included in the measures of somatic toxicity, which is characterized by loss of fat in the face, arms, and legs, and increase in fat in the base of the back of the neck and in the abdomen.

Participants who had values at Baseline and Week 96 are included in the analysis.

The dual energy X-ray absorptiometry (DEXA) scan is included in the measures of somatic toxicity, which is characterized by loss of fat in the face, arms, and legs, and increase in fat in the base of the back of the neck and in the abdomen.

Participants who had values at Baseline and Week 96 are included in the analysis.

The dual energy X-ray absorptiometry (DEXA) scan of bone mineral content was used to evaluate potential bone effects of treatment.

Participants who had values at Baseline and Week 96 are included in the analysis.