Eden 1991.

Methods	Method of randomisation not clear
Participants	630 children (age nm: an inclusion criterion for this study was age between 0 and 14 years; 337 boys and 293 girls) with acute lymphoblastic leukaemia (stage nm; nm if primary disease or relapse) Prior treatment nm Prior cardiac dysfunction nm
Interventions	Chemotherapy without daunorubicin (N = 308) versus chemotherapy including daunorubicin (N = 322) Cumulative daunorubicin dose nm (according to protocol 90 mg/m2); peak dose (i.e. the maximal dose received in one week) 90 mg/m2; infusion duration nm. Patients received cranial irradiation No surgery No cardioprotective interventions
Outcomes	Overall survival (definition nm) Event‐free survival (defined as time to relapse or death; patients who died without going into remission were counted as having an event on day 1) Tumour response (definition nm; we assumed that the number of total remitters provided in the article was the number of complete remissions)
Notes	Length of follow‐up nm Age in treatment and control group nm
Risk of bias
Bias	Authors' judgement	Support for judgement
Random sequence generation (selection bias)	Unclear risk	It was stated that this was a randomised study, but no further information on the methods of randomisation was provided
Allocation concealment (selection bias)	Unclear risk	It was stated that this was a randomised study, but no further information on the methods of randomisation was provided
Blinding of participants and personnel (performance bias)	High risk	Clinicians were "bound to record therapy given" and were thus not blinded to treatment. No information on blinding of participants was provided
Blinding of outcome assessment (detection bias): overall survival	Low risk	No information on blinding of outcome assessors was provided, but since this is not applicable for overall survival we judged this as a low risk of bias
Blinding of outcome assessment (detection bias): outcomes other than overall survival	Unclear risk	No information on blinding of outcome assessors was provided for event‐free survival and tumour response
Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias): overall survival	Low risk	It was stated that all patients were included in the analyses
Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias): event‐free survival	Low risk	It was stated that all patients were included in the analyses
Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias): tumour response	Low risk	It was stated that all patients were included in the analyses
Selective reporting (reporting bias)	High risk	There was no protocol mentioned in the manuscript (and we did not search for it), but not all expected outcomes were reported
Other bias	Unclear risk	Block randomisation in unblinded trials: unclear (see information provided at earlier associated risk of bias items) Baseline imbalance between treatment arms related to outcome (prior cardiotoxic treatment, age, sex and/or prior cardiac dysfunction): unclear (for all four items it was unclear if balanced between treatment arms) Difference in length of follow‐up between treatment arms: unclear (not reported) Inappropriate influence of funders: unclear (no information provided)