White 1998.

Methods	Multicentred, double‐blind randomised trial
Participants	Patients were eligible for the study if they were neutropenic following chemotherapy for hematologic malignancy or had undergone marrow or stem cell transplantation in the previous 3 months. Neutropenic children and adults (ANC ≤ 0.5x109/L or ANC ≤ 1x109/L and expected to decline to ≤ 0.5x109/L within 2 days ) were enrolled if they had pyrexia of unknown origin (72 hours of fever defined as a temperature ≥ 38°C not responding to broad‐spectrum antibacterial therapy) or recrudescent fever (temperature ≥ 38°C on two or more occasions after initial defervescence with antibacterial treatment)
Interventions	Amphotericin B colloidal dispersion (ABCD) versus conventional amphotericin B ABCD (4mg/kg/day) was compared with conventional amphotericin B (0.8mg/kg/day). Therapy was continued until recovery of neutrophils to > 0.5x109/L for 2 consecutive days, identification of an infection thought to be the cause of the fever, toxicity leading to study drug discontinuation or a maximum of 14 days. The period of follow up was 28 days
Outcomes	Endpoint 1: treatment success which included survival for ≥ 7 days after the last study drug, lack of suspected or documented fungal infection during the study and within 7 days of the last dose of the study drug, lack of study drug discontinuation because of adverse events and lack of fever on the day of discontinuation of therapy Endpoint 2: toxicity
Notes	Paediatric and adult population. Authors contacted for further data (5/12/2008). No further data were available. The authors stated that no difference between groups (i.e. children and adults administered conventional amphotericin B and ABCD) in efficacy endpoints, breakthrough fungal infection and drug discontinuation however data not available in the report. Rates of infusional toxicity more frequent with ABCD but subgroup analysis not reported. It is possible that Sandler et al (2000) and White et al (1998) may contain the same patients as the sponsor is the same, the methods were very similar, many of the institutions contributed data to both studies and number of paediatric patients enrolled were similar.
Risk of bias
Bias	Authors' judgement	Support for judgement
Adequate sequence generation?	Low risk	Randomisation was performed centrally with randomisation tables.
Allocation concealment?	Low risk	Central allocation prevented patients and investigators from identifying assignment.
Blinding? All outcomes	Low risk	Patients and investigators were blinded to the treatment administered. Preparation of the study drug was performed by an unblinded site pharmacist.
Incomplete outcome data addressed? All outcomes	Low risk	Patients enrolled: 213 patients. Seventeen patients were not evaluable because of study drug discontinuation before reaching a study endpoint or because of receipt of concomitant systemic antifungal therapy. Analysis performed on 196 patients. Three patients lost to follow up so response was assessed on 193 patients.
Free of selective reporting?	Low risk	All expected outcomes were included in the report however efficacy and infusional toxicity for children were not reported separately.
Free of other bias?	Low risk	The study appeared to be free from other sources of bias.