Table 2.
Experience of encountered resistance and preference of resistance management strategies (N = 575)
| Mainland China (n = 300) | South Korea (n = 100) | Taiwan (n = 100) | Thailand (n = 75) | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Experience with resistance in practice | ||||
| Ever encountered CHB patients with NA resistance | 100 | 98 | 96 | 95 |
| Ever encountered resistance when NA-naive patients initiated on LVD | 96 | 100 | 99 | 99 |
| Ever encountered resistance when NA-naive patients initiated on ADV | 32 | 58 | 18 | 28 |
| Ever encountered resistance when NA-naive patients initiated on ETV | 6 | 3 | 4 | 7 |
| Preference of resistance management strategies | ||||
| Prevention | 77 | 68 | 42 | 69 |
| Prediction | 15 | 15 | 13 | 4 |
| Rescue | 6 | 14 | 29 | 20 |
| Not important | 1 | 3 | 16 | 6 |
Telbivudine and clevudine were included in the survey; information is not available for all four geographic entities due to the market-approval status of these two products during the study period. As such, information for the two products is not shown. Values given are in percentages
NA nucleoside/nucleotide analog, LVD lamivudine, ADV adefovir dipivoxil, ETV entecavir