Hsu 2008.

Methods	Randomized phase II trial Inclusion criteria Cytologically or histologically confirmed NSCLC Stage IIIB or IV by AJCC ≥ 18 years of age PS: 0 to 2 Adequate organ function Bi‐dimensionally measurable disease Exclusion criteria Brain metastasis Prior serious cardiac or neurological conditions
Participants	GE arm: 43 participants (ITT population) ‐ median age: 62.3 years (33.9 to 78.6)/elderly participants not reported GP arm: 42 participants (ITT population) ‐ median age: 60.9 years (37.6 to 76)/elderly participants not reported
Interventions	GE arm: gemcitabine 1000 mg/m2 over 30‐minute i.v. infusion on days 1, 8, and 15 plus epirubicin 70 mg/m2 on day 15 GP arm: gemcitabine 1000 mg/m2 on days 1, 8, and 15 plus cisplatin 100 mg/m2 over 3‐hour i.v. infusion on day 15. Dose of cisplatin reduced to 80 mg/m2 after first 10 participants randomly assigned because of toxicity
Outcomes	Primary outcome Objective response rate Secondary outcomes Overall survival (defined from date of randomization to death) Time‐to‐progression: defined from date of randomization to death; progression or withdrawalfrom toxicity Toxicity
Notes	Despite multiple attempts, we could not contact study authors to retrieve data on the elderly population
Risk of bias
Bias	Authors' judgement	Support for judgement
Random sequence generation (selection bias)	Low risk	"Randomization was performed by an independent statistical office at the clinical trial centre of National Taiwan University Hospital, using a computer‐generated randomisation allocation sequence. The sequence was concealed until the treatment arms were assigned by the statistical office. EligIble patients were randomised in 1:1 ratio to two treatment arms, namely gemcitabine plus conventional‐dose epirubicin (GE) or gemcitabine—cisplatin (GC) arms"
Allocation concealment (selection bias)	Low risk	Sequence concealed until treatment arms assigned by the statistical office
Blinding of outcome assessment (detection bias) OS and 1y OS rate outcome	Unclear risk	Open‐label study considered to have unclear impact on mortality outcomes
Blinding of outcome assessment (detection bias) Other outcomes	High risk	Open‐label study
Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias) All outcomes	Low risk	One participant refused randomization; 5 participants refused protocol treatment after randomization (1 in GC arm and 4 in GE arm)
Selective reporting (reporting bias)	Low risk	No evidence of selective reporting
Other bias	Unclear risk	Study designed for general population; elderly subgroup analysis not planned nor available