Table 2.
Meta-analysis of the efficacy of tacrolimus in induction therapy of patients with lupus nephritis
| Therapeutic regimen | Indicators | Number of studies | Q test, P-value | Model selected | OR/WMD (95% CI) | P-value |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| ||||||
| TAC + GC vs CYC + GC | CR | 7 | 0.93 | Fixed | 2.41 (1.46, 3.99) | 0.0006 |
| TR | 7 | 0.79 | Fixed | 4.47 (2.24, 8.95) | <0.0001 | |
| Proteinuria levels | 4 | 0.41 | Fixed | −0.68 (−1.21, −0.15) | 0.01 | |
| Urine erythrocyte number | 2 | 0.93 | Fixed | −16.96 (−55.00, 21.07) | 0.38 | |
| Albumin | 3 | 0.13 | Fixed | 0.38 (0.10, 0.66) | 0.009 | |
| GFR | 2 | 0.51 | Fixed | −0.77 (−1.66, 0.12) | 0.09 | |
| Negative rate of ds-DNA | 5 | 0.84 | Fixed | 2.51 (1.14, 5.49) | 0.02 | |
| C3 levels | 3 | 0.41 | Fixed | 0.07 (−0.08, 0.21) | 0.37 | |
| C4 levels | 3 | 0.41 | Fixed | 0.02 (−0.04, 0.08) | 0.52 | |
| SLE-DAI | 4 | 0.75 | Fixed | −2.00 (−3.16, −0.85) | 0.0007 | |
| TAC + GC vs MMF + GC | CR | 3 | 0.18 | Fixed | 0.95 (0.54, 1.64) | 0.84 |
| TR | 3 | 0.42 | Fixed | 1.43 (0.70, 2.91) | 0.33 | |
| Proteinuria levels | 2 | 0.09 | Random | 0.08 (−0.39, 0.55) | 0.75 | |
| Albumin | 2 | 0.02 | Random | −0.90 (−5.77, 3.96) | 0.72 | |
| TAC + MMF + GC vs CYC + GC | CR | 2 | 0.07 | Random | 5.13 (0.75, 35.02) | 0.10 |
| TR | 2 | 0.15 | Fixed | 3.32 (2.08, 5.32) | <0.00001 | |
| Urinary protein decline | 2 | 0.12 | Fixed | −0.90 (−1.40, −0.40) | 0.0004 | |
| Rise of serum albumin | 2 | 0.25 | Fixed | 1.96 (0.63, 3.29) | 0.004 | |
| Negative rate of ds-DNA | 2 | 0.82 | Fixed | 1.67 (1.00, 2.79) | 0.05 | |
Abbreviations: TAC, tacrolimus; GC, glucocorticoids; MMF, mycophenolate mofetil; CYC, cyclophosphamide; CR, complete remission; TR, total remission, complete plus partial remission; SLE-DAI, systemic lupus erythematosus disease activity index; GFR, glomerular filtration rate; WMD, weighted mean difference.