Now we are 13. Open Research Online becomes a teenager!

The history of the Open University (UK) institutional repository (Open Research Online) is one of changing requirements as defined by its research community, institutional administrators and external HE policy. How the repository has responded to these changes has ensured its success. However, how we manage the (potentially) competing requirements of compliance monitoring and Open Access dissemination will determine the future of the repository

Enhancing discovery and enriching the scholarly graph with the Research Outputs Metadata Schema (Rioxx)

This contribution considers recent updates to Rioxx, the Research Outputs Metadata Schema [1]. Originally an OAI-PMH metadata application profile for open repositories in the UK, Rioxx version 2.0 has been broadly supported by institutional repositories in the UK since 2016 and has also enabled a level of OpenAIRE participation from institutions for whom compliance was always problematic [2]. More recently Rioxx has entered candidate release status for version 3.0 in which a more holistic and less UK centric approach to the schema has been adopted. This approach has sought to continue the schema’s previously evidenced harvesting and aggregation benefits [3] while also improving the capture of graph relations to other scholarly entities. Rioxx 3.0 introduces superior modelling of associative relationships between scholarly entities, harnesses greater use of persistent identifiers (PIDs), and reuses semantics from schema.org [4] while retaining OAI-PMH as the principal data harvesting mechanism. The schema delivers a useful contribution to burgeoning open scholarly graphs since it can better model relational associations between scholarly entities, enabling research organizations to capture these relations at deposit source and contribute them to the graph via aggregation services, such as CORE [5,6]. Such data once aggregated, and merged with existing PID data, has the potential to greatly enrich the formal PID graph but also enhance user discovery of related research entities, most notably research publications, datasets, software, projects, and grants. Explicit encoding of resource deposit and exposure dates further presents opportunities for better tracking open access growth and monitoring the evolution of this growth at scale. This contribution will explore examples of features from the Rioxx candidate release, exploring the significance of the changes between version 2.0 and 3.0, and demonstrating some of its relational potential with respect to the scholarly graph. We will also consider the deployment of schema.org vocabularies as a useful, semantically interoperable mechanism for better communicating output type semantics. Future developments, such as the creation of a new Rioxx validator within the CORE repository dashboard, will be briefly summarized

Exploring the concept of 'custodianship' in harvesting repository resources and graphing their relations : Rioxx version 3.0

This submission addresses concepts associated with Rioxx version 3.0, the schema and specification for which was published in late 2023, following feedback gleaned during OR2023. 'Rioxx: The Research Output Schema' proposes a metadata profile to better ensure superior harvesting and ergo aggregation of scholarly content. It also promote greater semantic interoperability, as well as the graphing of essential research output relations. To assist with its metadata modelling, Rioxx version 3.0 introduces the concept of direct and external custodianship. This submission will explore this concept, establish how custodianship is reflected in the Rioxx schema, and demonstrate how such modelling benefits both repositories and external software agents (such as harvesters and aggregators). The submission will also demonstrate how Rioxx can be used to underpin aspects of open research policy monitoring

Substrate and Stereochemical Control of Peptidoglycan Cross-Linking by Transpeptidation by Escherichia coli PBP1B

Penicillin binding proteins (PBPs) catalyzing transpeptidation reactions that stabilize the peptidoglycan component of the bacterial cell wall are the targets of β-lactams, the most clinically successful antibiotics to date. However, PBP-transpeptidation enzymology has evaded detailed analysis, because of the historical unavailability of kinetically competent assays with physiologically relevant substrates and the previously unappreciated contribution of protein cofactors to PBP activity. By re-engineering peptidoglycan synthesis, we have constructed a continuous spectrophotometric assay for transpeptidation of native or near native peptidoglycan precursors and fragments by Escherichia coli PBP1B, allowing us to (a) identify recognition elements of transpeptidase substrates, (b) reveal a novel mechanism of stereochemical editing within peptidoglycan transpeptidation, (c) assess the impact of peptidoglycan substrates on β-lactam targeting of transpeptidation, and (d) demonstrate that both substrates have to be bound before transpeptidation occurs. The results allow characterization of high molecular weight PBPs as enzymes and not merely the targets of β-lactam acylation

Evidence for niche adaptation in the genome of the bovine pathogen Streptococcus uberis.

BACKGROUND: Streptococcus uberis, a Gram positive bacterial pathogen responsible for a significant proportion of bovine mastitis in commercial dairy herds, colonises multiple body sites of the cow including the gut, genital tract and mammary gland. Comparative analysis of the complete genome sequence of S. uberis strain 0140J was undertaken to help elucidate the biology of this effective bovine pathogen. RESULTS: The genome revealed 1,825 predicted coding sequences (CDSs) of which 62 were identified as pseudogenes or gene fragments. Comparisons with related pyogenic streptococci identified a conserved core (40%) of orthologous CDSs. Intriguingly, S. uberis 0140J displayed a lower number of mobile genetic elements when compared with other pyogenic streptococci, however bacteriophage-derived islands and a putative genomic island were identified. Comparative genomics analysis revealed most similarity to the genomes of Streptococcus agalactiae and Streptococcus equi subsp. zooepidemicus. In contrast, streptococcal orthologs were not identified for 11% of the CDSs, indicating either unique retention of ancestral sequence, or acquisition of sequence from alternative sources. Functions including transport, catabolism, regulation and CDSs encoding cell envelope proteins were over-represented in this unique gene set; a limited array of putative virulence CDSs were identified. CONCLUSION: S. uberis utilises nutritional flexibility derived from a diversity of metabolic options to successfully occupy a discrete ecological niche. The features observed in S. uberis are strongly suggestive of an opportunistic pathogen adapted to challenging and changing environmental parameters.RIGHTS : This article is licensed under the BioMed Central licence at http://www.biomedcentral.com/about/license which is similar to the 'Creative Commons Attribution Licence'. In brief you may : copy, distribute, and display the work; make derivative works; or make commercial use of the work - under the following conditions: the original author must be given credit; for any reuse or distribution, it must be made clear to others what the license terms of this work are

Carbohydrate scaffolds as glycosyltransferase inhibitors with in vivo antibacterial activity

The rapid rise of multi-drug-resistant bacteria is a global healthcare crisis, and new antibiotics are urgently required, especially those with modes of action that have low-resistance potential. One promising lead is the liposaccharide antibiotic moenomycin that inhibits bacterial glycosyltransferases, which are essential for peptidoglycan polymerization, while displaying a low rate of resistance. Unfortunately, the lipophilicity of moenomycin leads to unfavourable pharmacokinetic properties that render it unsuitable for systemic administration. In this study, we show that using moenomycin and other glycosyltransferase inhibitors as templates, we were able to synthesize compound libraries based on novel pyranose scaffold chemistry, with moenomycin-like activity, but with improved drug-like properties. The novel compounds exhibit in vitro inhibition comparable to moenomycin, with low toxicity and good efficacy in several in vivo models of infection. This approach based on non-planar carbohydrate scaffolds provides a new opportunity to develop new antibiotics with low propensity for resistance induction

The SANAD II study of the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of levetiracetam, zonisamide, or lamotrigine for newly diagnosed focal epilepsy: an open-label, non-inferiority, multicentre, phase 4, randomised controlled trial

Background: Levetiracetam and zonisamide are licensed as monotherapy for patients with focal epilepsy, but there is uncertainty as to whether they should be recommended as first-line treatments because of insufficient evidence of clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness. We aimed to assess the long-term clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of levetiracetam and zonisamide compared with lamotrigine in people with newly diagnosed focal epilepsy. Methods: This randomised, open-label, controlled trial compared levetiracetam and zonisamide with lamotrigine as first-line treatment for patients with newly diagnosed focal epilepsy. Adult and paediatric neurology services across the UK recruited participants aged 5 years or older (with no upper age limit) with two or more unprovoked focal seizures. Participants were randomly allocated (1:1:1) using a minimisation programme with a random element utilising factor to receive lamotrigine, levetiracetam, or zonisamide. Participants and investigators were not masked and were aware of treatment allocation. SANAD II was designed to assess non-inferiority of both levetiracetam and zonisamide to lamotrigine for the primary outcome of time to 12-month remission. Anti-seizure medications were taken orally and for participants aged 12 years or older the initial advised maintenance doses were lamotrigine 50 mg (morning) and 100 mg (evening), levetiracetam 500 mg twice per day, and zonisamide 100 mg twice per day. For children aged between 5 and 12 years the initial daily maintenance doses advised were lamotrigine 1·5 mg/kg twice per day, levetiracetam 20 mg/kg twice per day, and zonisamide 2·5 mg/kg twice per day. All participants were included in the intention-to-treat (ITT) analysis. The per-protocol (PP) analysis excluded participants with major protocol deviations and those who were subsequently diagnosed as not having epilepsy. Safety analysis included all participants who received one dose of any study drug. The non-inferiority limit was a hazard ratio (HR) of 1·329, which equates to an absolute difference of 10%. A HR greater than 1 indicated that an event was more likely on lamotrigine. The trial is registered with the ISRCTN registry, 30294119 (EudraCt number: 2012-001884-64). Findings: 990 participants were recruited between May 2, 2013, and June 20, 2017, and followed up for a further 2 years. Patients were randomly assigned to receive lamotrigine (n=330), levetiracetam (n=332), or zonisamide (n=328). The ITT analysis included all participants and the PP analysis included 324 participants randomly assigned to lamotrigine, 320 participants randomly assigned to levetiracetam, and 315 participants randomly assigned to zonisamide. Levetiracetam did not meet the criteria for non-inferiority in the ITT analysis of time to 12-month remission versus lamotrigine (HR 1·18; 97·5% CI 0·95–1·47) but zonisamide did meet the criteria for non-inferiority in the ITT analysis versus lamotrigine (1·03; 0·83–1·28). The PP analysis showed that 12-month remission was superior with lamotrigine than both levetiracetam (HR 1·32 [97·5% CI 1·05 to 1·66]) and zonisamide (HR 1·37 [1·08–1·73]). There were 37 deaths during the trial. Adverse reactions were reported by 108 (33%) participants who started lamotrigine, 144 (44%) participants who started levetiracetam, and 146 (45%) participants who started zonisamide. Lamotrigine was superior in the cost-utility analysis, with a higher net health benefit of 1·403 QALYs (97·5% central range 1·319–1·458) compared with 1·222 (1·110–1·283) for levetiracetam and 1·232 (1·112, 1·307) for zonisamide at a cost-effectiveness threshold of £20 000 per QALY. Cost-effectiveness was based on differences between treatment groups in costs and QALYs. Interpretation: These findings do not support the use of levetiracetam or zonisamide as first-line treatments for patients with focal epilepsy. Lamotrigine should remain a first-line treatment for patients with focal epilepsy and should be the standard treatment in future trials. Funding: National Institute for Health Research Health Technology Assessment programme

The SANAD II study of the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of valproate versus levetiracetam for newly diagnosed generalised and unclassifiable epilepsy: an open-label, non-inferiority, multicentre, phase 4, randomised controlled trial

Background: Valproate is a first-line treatment for patients with newly diagnosed idiopathic generalised or difficult to classify epilepsy, but not for women of child-bearing potential because of teratogenicity. Levetiracetam is increasingly prescribed for these patient populations despite scarcity of evidence of clinical effectiveness or cost-effectiveness. We aimed to compare the long-term clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of levetiracetam compared with valproate in participants with newly diagnosed generalised or unclassifiable epilepsy. Methods: We did an open-label, randomised controlled trial to compare levetiracetam with valproate as first-line treatment for patients with generalised or unclassified epilepsy. Adult and paediatric neurology services (69 centres overall) across the UK recruited participants aged 5 years or older (with no upper age limit) with two or more unprovoked generalised or unclassifiable seizures. Participants were randomly allocated (1:1) to receive either levetiracetam or valproate, using a minimisation programme with a random element utilising factors. Participants and investigators were aware of treatment allocation. For participants aged 12 years or older, the initial advised maintenance doses were 500 mg twice per day for levetiracetam and valproate, and for children aged 5–12 years, the initial daily maintenance doses advised were 25 mg/kg for valproate and 40 mg/kg for levetiracetam. All drugs were administered orally. SANAD II was designed to assess the non-inferiority of levetiracetam compared with valproate for the primary outcome time to 12-month remission. The non-inferiority limit was a hazard ratio (HR) of 1·314, which equates to an absolute difference of 10%. A HR greater than 1 indicated that an event was more likely on valproate. All participants were included in the intention-to-treat (ITT) analysis. Per-protocol (PP) analyses excluded participants with major protocol deviations and those who were subsequently diagnosed as not having epilepsy. Safety analyses included all participants who received one dose of any study drug. This trial is registered with the ISRCTN registry, 30294119 (EudraCt number: 2012-001884-64). Findings: 520 participants were recruited between April 30, 2013, and Aug 2, 2016, and followed up for a further 2 years. 260 participants were randomly allocated to receive levetiracetam and 260 participants to receive valproate. The ITT analysis included all participants and the PP analysis included 255 participants randomly allocated to valproate and 254 randomly allocated to levetiracetam. Median age of participants was 13·9 years (range 5·0–94·4), 65% were male and 35% were female, 397 participants had generalised epilepsy, and 123 unclassified epilepsy. Levetiracetam did not meet the criteria for non-inferiority in the ITT analysis of time to 12-month remission (HR 1·19 [95% CI 0·96–1·47]); non-inferiority margin 1·314. The PP analysis showed that the 12-month remission was superior with valproate than with levetiracetam. There were two deaths, one in each group, that were unrelated to trial treatments. Adverse reactions were reported by 96 (37%) participants randomly assigned to valproate and 107 (42%) participants randomly assigned to levetiracetam. Levetiracetam was dominated by valproate in the cost-utility analysis, with a negative incremental net health benefit of −0·040 (95% central range −0·175 to 0·037) and a probability of 0·17 of being cost-effectiveness at a threshold of £20 000 per quality-adjusted life-year. Cost-effectiveness was based on differences between treatment groups in costs and quality-adjusted life-years. Interpretation: Compared with valproate, levetiracetam was found to be neither clinically effective nor cost-effective. For girls and women of child-bearing potential, these results inform discussions about benefit and harm of avoiding valproate. Funding: National Institute for Health Research Health Technology Assessment Programme

Outcomes following small bowel obstruction due to malignancy in the national audit of small bowel obstruction

Introduction Patients with cancer who develop small bowel obstruction are at high risk of malnutrition and morbidity following compromise of gastrointestinal tract continuity. This study aimed to characterise current management and outcomes following malignant small bowel obstruction. Methods A prospective, multicentre cohort study of patients with small bowel obstruction who presented to UK hospitals between 16th January and 13th March 2017. Patients who presented with small bowel obstruction due to primary tumours of the intestine (excluding left-sided colonic tumours) or disseminated intra-abdominal malignancy were included. Outcomes included 30-day mortality and in-hospital complications. Cox-proportional hazards models were used to generate adjusted effects estimates, which are presented as hazard ratios (HR) alongside the corresponding 95% confidence interval (95% CI). The threshold for statistical significance was set at the level of P ≤ 0.05 a-priori. Results 205 patients with malignant small bowel obstruction presented to emergency surgery services during the study period. Of these patients, 50 had obstruction due to right sided colon cancer, 143 due to disseminated intraabdominal malignancy, 10 had primary tumours of the small bowel and 2 patients had gastrointestinal stromal tumours. In total 100 out of 205 patients underwent a surgical intervention for obstruction. 30-day in-hospital mortality rate was 11.3% for those with primary tumours and 19.6% for those with disseminated malignancy. Severe risk of malnutrition was an independent predictor for poor mortality in this cohort (adjusted HR 16.18, 95% CI 1.86 to 140.84, p = 0.012). Patients with right-sided colon cancer had high rates of morbidity. Conclusions Mortality rates were high in patients with disseminated malignancy and in those with right sided colon cancer. Further research should identify optimal management strategy to reduce morbidity for these patient groups