Abstract:T cells recognising cognate pMHC antigens become activated to elicit a myriad of cellular responses, such as target cell killing and the secretion of different cytokines, that collectively contribute to adaptive immunity. These effector responses have been hypothesised to exhibit different antigen dose and affinity thresholds, suggesting that pathogen-specific information may be encoded within the nature of the antigen. Here, using systematic experiments in a reductionist system, where primary human CD8 + T ce… Show more
“…We hypothesised that the absence of ligands for co-signalling receptors may account for this reduction in antigen discrimination. It has been shown that ligation of co-signalling receptors can greatly enhance antigen potency (42,44). Inclusion of recombinant ICAM1 (a ligand of LFA-1) or CD58 (the ligand to CD2) increased TCR downregulation ( Figure S4) and antigen potency ( Figure 3C) in this experimental system, consistent with previous reports using APCs (44,45).…”
Section: The Discrimination Power Of T Cells Is Dependent On Ligands supporting
confidence: 89%
“…Since APCs express ligands for many co-signalling receptors, we adopted a reductionist system (42,43) where recombinant pMHCs are presented on plates with or without ligands for co-signalling receptors before being used as stimulation surfaces for 1G4 T cell blasts ( Figure 3A).…”
Section: The Discrimination Power Of T Cells Is Dependent On Ligands mentioning
T cells use their T cell receptors (TCRs) to discriminate between peptide MHC (pMHC) ligands that bind with different affinities but precisely how different remains controversial. This is partly because the affinities of physiologically relevant interactions are often too weak to measure. Here, we introduce a surface plasmon resonance protocol to measure ultra-low TCR/pMHC affinities (KD ~ 1000 μM). Using naïve, memory, and blasted human CD8+ T cells we find that their discrimination power is unexpectedly low, in that they require a large >100-fold decrease in affinity to abolish responses. Interestingly, the discrimination power reduces further when antigen is presented in isolation on artificial surfaces but can be partially restored by adding ligands to CD2 or LFA-1. We were able to fit the kinetic proof-reading model to our data, yielding the first estimates for both the time delay (2.8 s) and number of biochemical steps (2.67). The fractional number of steps suggest that one of the proof-reading steps is not easily reversible.
“…We hypothesised that the absence of ligands for co-signalling receptors may account for this reduction in antigen discrimination. It has been shown that ligation of co-signalling receptors can greatly enhance antigen potency (42,44). Inclusion of recombinant ICAM1 (a ligand of LFA-1) or CD58 (the ligand to CD2) increased TCR downregulation ( Figure S4) and antigen potency ( Figure 3C) in this experimental system, consistent with previous reports using APCs (44,45).…”
Section: The Discrimination Power Of T Cells Is Dependent On Ligands supporting
confidence: 89%
“…Since APCs express ligands for many co-signalling receptors, we adopted a reductionist system (42,43) where recombinant pMHCs are presented on plates with or without ligands for co-signalling receptors before being used as stimulation surfaces for 1G4 T cell blasts ( Figure 3A).…”
Section: The Discrimination Power Of T Cells Is Dependent On Ligands mentioning
T cells use their T cell receptors (TCRs) to discriminate between peptide MHC (pMHC) ligands that bind with different affinities but precisely how different remains controversial. This is partly because the affinities of physiologically relevant interactions are often too weak to measure. Here, we introduce a surface plasmon resonance protocol to measure ultra-low TCR/pMHC affinities (KD ~ 1000 μM). Using naïve, memory, and blasted human CD8+ T cells we find that their discrimination power is unexpectedly low, in that they require a large >100-fold decrease in affinity to abolish responses. Interestingly, the discrimination power reduces further when antigen is presented in isolation on artificial surfaces but can be partially restored by adding ligands to CD2 or LFA-1. We were able to fit the kinetic proof-reading model to our data, yielding the first estimates for both the time delay (2.8 s) and number of biochemical steps (2.67). The fractional number of steps suggest that one of the proof-reading steps is not easily reversible.
“…4D). This is consistent with a TCR-proximal mechanism of antigen discrimination (44,45) that has a similar threshold for different T cell responses (46)(47)(48).…”
Section: The Discrimination Power Is Similar For Different T Cell Ressupporting
confidence: 84%
“…We found a number of studies, including previous work from our laboratory, that relied on reductionist systems where recombinant pMHC is presented in isolation on plates (e.g. biotinylated pMHC immobilised on streptavidin-coated plates (10,11,47,53,54)). To assess the impact of artificial presentation, we quantified discrimination powers from these studies finding that α decreased significantly from 2.0 on APCs to 0.93 when presented on artificial surfaces (Fig.…”
Section: The Discrimination Power Is Similar For Different T Cell Resmentioning
T cells use their T-cell receptors (TCRs) to discriminate between lower-affinity self and higher-affinity non-self pMHC antigens. The strength of this discrimination and the mechanisms that produce it remain controversial. Although a large number of mouse and human TCRs have now been characterised, they have not been used to precisely quantitate discrimination. Here, we systematically quantify the discrimination of TCRs using a discrimination power (α). Early influential studies on three mouse TCRs suggested that discrimination was nearly perfect (α ~ 9.0). In striking contrast, our analysis of published data on other mouse and human TCRs, and more recent data on the original mouse TCRs, produced significantly lower discrimination (α = 2.0). Although not perfect, the discriminatory power of TCR was greater than that of conventional receptors such as cytokine receptors, GPCRs, RTKs, and CARs (α ≤ 1). The revised discriminatory power of the TCR is readily explained by a kinetic proofreading mechanisms, and accounts for the ability of low affinity self-antigens to stimulate autoimmune and anti-tumour T cell responses.
“…There is accumulating evidence that genetic background, private TCR specificities and immunological history are key factors contributing to the final outcome of antigen exposure-whether to confer protective immunity or induce damaging immunopathology (25,38,39). It is of note that peptide recognition is not a simple on/off event, and that the same T cell can respond in different ways to modified peptides, by for example, pMHC affinity and dose thresholds (40,41), co-stimulatory molecules (42), and hierarchical organization of thresholds (43,44).…”
Section: Predicting Cross-recognition Potential Of T Cell Receptorsmentioning
Adaptive immune recognition is mediated by specific interactions between heterodimeric T cell receptors (TCRs) and their cognate peptide-MHC (pMHC) ligands, and the methods to accurately predict TCR:pMHC interaction would have profound clinical, therapeutic and pharmaceutical applications. Herein, we review recent developments in predicting cross-reactivity and antigen specificity of TCR recognition. We discuss current experimental and computational approaches to investigate cross-reactivity and antigen-specificity of TCRs and highlight how integrating kinetic, biophysical and structural features may offer valuable insights in modeling immunogenicity. We further underscore the close interrelationship of these two interconnected notions and the need to investigate each in the light of the other for a better understanding of T cell responsiveness for the effective clinical applications.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.