Gkritsios 2014.

Study characteristics
Methods	randomized single center/Greece
Participants	Study setting primary and recurrent Eligibility criteria patients with suspected or confirmed NMIBC Non‐eligibility criteria patients scheduled for a second TURBT porphyria gross hematuria known allergy to HAL presence of > 4 solitary tumors large tumors (> 3 cm in diameter) Intervention cohort participants recruited: 66 unifocal/multifocal tumors: NR Comparator cohort participants recruited: 64 unifocal/multifocal tumors: NR
Interventions	Intervention: WLC + BLC followed by WL‐TURBT + BL‐TURBT Comparator: WLC followed by WL‐TURBT Adjuvant instillation therapy: 50 mg epirubicin
Outcomes	Outcome(s)* recurrence‐free survival detection rate recurrence rate false‐positive rate adverse events surgeon opinion on whether blue light "helped them with patient" Results median follow‐up: 40 months RFS was 31.0 months in intervention group vs 27.0 months in comparator group recurrence rate within 40 months was 37.5% in intervention group vs 45.9% in comparator group (P = 0.507) surgeon opinion: in 34 out of the 54 participants (63%, 95% CI 50.1 to 75.8) blue light was helpful
Funding sources	NR
Declarations of interest	NR
Contact of study author	Date of contact attempt to first study author: 30 November 2020 Contact status: no reply to date
Notes
Risk of bias
Bias	Authors' judgement	Support for judgement
Random sequence generation (selection bias)	Low risk	Quote: "randomization plan was produced with the use of an electronic randomization plan generator (randomization.com), with the method of randomly permuted blocks" Comment: method of sequence generation clearly described
Allocation concealment (selection bias)	Unclear risk	Quote: "randomization plan was produced with the use of an electronic randomization plan generator (randomization.com), with the method of randomly permuted blocks" Comment: method of sequence generation clearly described
Blinding of participants and personnel (performance bias) Surgeon	High risk	Quote: NA Comment: surgeon unblinded
Blinding of participants and personnel (performance bias) Participants/study personnel	Unclear risk	Quote: NA Comment: unclear whether study participants and other study personnel were blinded
Blinding of outcome assessment (detection bias) Subjective outcomes (all outcomes)	Unclear risk	Quote: NA Comment: unclear whether study personnel were blinded
Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias) Oncological outcomes	High risk	Quote: "excluded from follow‐up n=6 and n=13, respectively (see figure 1)" Comment: high rate (≥ 20%) of participants lost to follow‐up
Selective reporting (reporting bias)	Low risk	Quote: NA Comment: reporting according to the protocol (UMIN000008176) of primary and secondary outcome measures
Other bias	Low risk	Quote: NA Comment: no other bias identified