Ji 2001.

Methods	Study type: quasi‐RCT Study time frame/year of transplantation: 1996 to 1998 Duration of follow‐up: 6 months
Participants	Country: China Setting: single centre Primary deceased donor kidney transplantation; PRA negative; negative cross‐match Deceased donor: 100% Previous transplantation: not reported PRA level: max. 6% HLA mismatch (mean): 3 Cold ischaemia time: not reported Delayed graft function: not reported Number: treatment group (56); control group (50) Mean age: 39 Sex (M/F): not reported Exclusion criteria: HLA (A, B, DR) > 3 mismatches; contraindication against CsA, steroids, AZA, MMF; contraindication against oral medication
Interventions	Treatment group MMF 1 g/d, orally Control group AZA 50 mg/d, orally Concomitant immunosuppression Induction antibody: ATG/ALG, all patients CsA (formulation not reported), target C0 (month 3): 500 ng/mL Corticosteroids
Outcomes	Death Graft loss Primary non‐function Acute rejection Infections Adverse events (diarrhoea, leucopenia, elevated liver enzymes)
Notes	Publication: full journal article Language: Chinese
Risk of bias
Bias	Authors' judgement	Support for judgement
Random sequence generation (selection bias)	High risk	Quasi‐RCT, patients allocated in alternating sequence
Allocation concealment (selection bias)	High risk	Patients were consecutively enrolled and were allocated to the treatment arms in alternating sequence
Blinding of participants and personnel (performance bias) All outcomes	High risk	No blinding
Blinding of outcome assessment (detection bias) All outcomes	Unclear risk	Insufficient information to permit judgment
Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias) All outcomes	Unclear risk	ITT analysis unclear; all patients followed‐up
Selective reporting (reporting bias)	Low risk	The published report included most expected outcomes regarding efficacy and safety
Other bias	Low risk	The study was funded by a university grant