Vogler 1992.

Methods	Design: RCT with two arms: IDA versus DNR Recruitment period: December 1985 to January 1989 Median follow‐up: not stated
Participants	Eligibility criteria: > 14 years previously untreated AML defined by FAB criteria normal cardiac ejection fraction as determined by the normal value at each of the participating institutions Patients randomised (n = 230) IDA arm: n = 111 DNR arm: n = 119 Median age: IDA arm: 60 years (range not stated) DNR arm: 61 years (range not stated) Gender (male, female): IDA arm: n = 56, n = 49 DNR arm: n = 53, n = 60 Country: United States, 16 centres
Interventions	IDA arm: IA regimen, 1 to 2 cycles IDA: 12 mg/m²/d for 3 days, IV Ara‐C: 100 mg/m²/d for 7 days, IV DNR arm: DA regimen, 1 to 2 cycles DNR: 45 mg/m²/d for 3 days, IV Ara‐C: 100 mg/m²/d for 7 days, IV
Outcomes	Outcomes and time‐points from the study that are considered in the review: reported: OS, DFS, CR, death on induction therapy, relapse, AEs not reported: quality of life
Notes	Published as a journal article Funded in part by Adria Laboratories, the manufacturer of idarubicin No conflict of interest statement Updated data were published in 1997
Risk of bias
Bias	Authors' judgement	Support for judgement
Random sequence generation (selection bias)	Low risk	Quote: "patients were assigned randomly to" Comment: the study probably had an adequate sequence generation
Allocation concealment (selection bias)	Unclear risk	No information provided
Blinding (performance bias and detection bias) Overall survival	Low risk	Comment: the review authors judge that the outcome OS is unlikely to be influenced by lack of blinding
Blinding (performance bias and detection bias) All other outcomes	High risk	Comment: blinding was not explicitly stated
Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias) OS and DFS	Low risk	Quote: "No. of patients randomized: IDR 111, DNR 119", "Exclusions: Wrong diagnosis: IDR 2, DNR 1; Protocol violations: IDR 4, DNR 2; Randomized, not treated: DNR 1; Died before treatment: DNR 2" Comment: the small number of missing outcome data were balanced in numbers across intervention groups, with similar reasons for missing data across groups
Selective reporting (reporting bias)	Unclear risk	Comment: the study has no registered study protocol. The review authors have no information to permit judgement
Other bias	High risk	Comment: baseline characteristics of patients were imbalanced in platelet count. The median platelet count was significantly higher on the IDA arm (P value = 0.023)