Wolff 1985.

Study characteristics
Methods	This was a randomised, double‐blind, parallel‐group trial, which lasted 8 weeks.
Participants	The study recruited 12 participants (9 from the intervention group and 3 from the control group) with early plaque or patch stage MF (stage IA or IB), with no evidence of physical examination on lymphadenopathy or organomegaly. Demographics of the included participants 10 men and 2 women Mean age (range) = 56.7 years (39 to 74 years) Stages of disease: IA: 7; IB: 5 0 participants were lost to follow‐up Exclusion criteria of the trial Any prior systemic chemotherapy or radiation therapy Not been treated with any topical steroids, nitrogen mustard, or psoralens and UVA for 4 weeks prior to therapy with study medication
Interventions	The intervention group was given different interventions for 3 lesions for 4 weeks consisting of: a) IFN‐α 2MU in superficial dermis 3 times weekly; b) betamethasone dipropionate ointment 0.05% twice daily; or c) no treatment. The control group was given different interventions for 3 lesions consisting of: a) placebo (buffered glycine serum human albumin) in superficial dermis 3 times weekly; b) betamethasone dipropionate ointment 0.05% twice daily; or c) no treatment.
Outcomes	Outcomes of the trial Common adverse effects of the treatments Percentage of participants demonstrating complete response
Notes	Objective response was reported as mean difference in size of lesions without the possibility to identify participants' objective response rate according to our defined secondary outcome. Lesions in the IFN‐α group generally improved better than in the placebo group, possibly due to a systemic effect of IFN‐α as discussed by the authors. The IFN‐α was supplied by Schering Corp. This study was conducted in a tertiary care centre in Pittsburgh, USA. Conflicts of interest were not declared.
Risk of bias
Bias	Authors' judgement	Support for judgement
Random sequence generation (selection bias)	Unclear risk	The study did not provide information about this. We sought information, but received no response.
Allocation concealment (selection bias)	Unclear risk	The study did not provide information about this. We sought information, but received no response.
Blinding of participants and personnel (performance bias) All outcomes	Low risk	This trial had a double‐blind setting.
Blinding of outcome assessment (detection bias) All outcomes	Low risk	Histopathological features of biopsies were assessed without knowledge of the treatment or group.
Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias) All outcomes	Low risk	ITT analysis was carried out. There were no dropouts.
Selective reporting (reporting bias)	High risk	Only the mean difference in the decrease of the lesions were reported; no incidence of partial remission (i.e. > 50% reduction of disease) was reported. The corresponding author was contacted for additional outcome data but did not respond within 4 weeks.
Other bias	High risk	The groups were unequal: There was a higher proportion of stage 1B, more men, longer duration of skin disease, and longer time since diagnosis in intervention group.