[In Medea's gardens--two tales of colchicine]

Colchicine is a highly active alkaloid used in the treatment of acute inflammatory syndromes such as Mediterranean fever, M. Behçet or gouty arthritis. The two cases we present here illustrate exemplarily the pros and contras of colchicine therapy. In the first case, colchicine was successfully given for recurrent febrile attacks due to acute rheumatic fever. The second patient unfortunately had a fatal colchicine intoxication. The pharmacology of colchicine, the clinical features associated with overdose and the options for treatment are discussed. Colchicine should not be given in combination with macrolides, especially in patients with renal insufficiency.

The sleeper effect: Artifact or phenomenon—A brief comment on Bell et al. (2013)

OBJECTIVE: Bell, Marcus, and Goodlad (2013) recently conducted a meta-analysis of randomized controlled additive trials and found that adding an additional component to an existing treatment vis-à-vis the existing treatment produced larger effect sizes on targeted outcomes at 6-months follow-up than at termination, an effect they labeled as a sleeper effect. One of the limitations with Bell et al.'s detection of the sleeper effect was that they did not conduct a statistical test of the size of the effect at follow-up versus termination. METHOD: To statistically test if the differences of effect sizes between the additive conditions and the control conditions at follow-up differed from those at termination, we used a restricted maximum-likelihood random-effect model with known variances to conduct a multilevel longitudinal meta-analysis (k = 30). RESULTS: Although the small effects at termination detected by Bell et al. were replicated (ds = 0.17-0.23), none of the analyses of growth from termination to follow-up produced statistically significant effects (ds < 0.08; p > .20), and when asymmetry was considered using trim-and-fill procedure or the studies after 2000 were analyzed, magnitude of the sleeper effect was negligible (d = 0.00). CONCLUSION: There is no empirical evidence to support the sleeper effect.