1989
DOI: 10.1016/0167-5699(89)90247-8
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Why peptides? Their possible role in the evolution of MHC-restricted T-cell recognition

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1

Citation Types

1
20
0
2

Year Published

1990
1990
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
8
1

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 50 publications
(23 citation statements)
references
References 50 publications
1
20
0
2
Order By: Relevance
“…Self-reactive T cells are controlled either by their elimination in the thymus or by the induction of tolerance in the periphery (1,2). Both mechanisms depend on the ability of APCs to process and present self-peptides in the context of MHC molecules, although it is now apparent that not all possible peptides from a self-antigen are presented (3,4). These limitations in processing suggest that T cells specific for some determinants on self-proteins may escape tolerance and therefore be a part of the normal repertoire of T cells.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Self-reactive T cells are controlled either by their elimination in the thymus or by the induction of tolerance in the periphery (1,2). Both mechanisms depend on the ability of APCs to process and present self-peptides in the context of MHC molecules, although it is now apparent that not all possible peptides from a self-antigen are presented (3,4). These limitations in processing suggest that T cells specific for some determinants on self-proteins may escape tolerance and therefore be a part of the normal repertoire of T cells.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…This structure evidently binds peptides derived from proteins either endogenously synthesized (for MHC class I) or exogenously acquired (for MHC class II) (4). T-cell receptors either recognize peptides and MHC molecules simultaneously or the peptide alone in "the context" of the MHC molecules (5,6).…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…self versus infectious agent versus nutriment [36]. Finally, recent findings demonstrating that similar but not identical peptide analogs of self-epitopes do not only interfere with T cell recognition, but even actively inhibit T cell responses suggest that also partially homolo gous peptides may play an important role in this type of control [37,38]. In such a scenario, the identification of hsp-reactive T cells within autoimmune lesions need not necessarily reflect their functioning as effectors of de struction.…”
Section: Concluding Remarks and Outlookmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Therefore, the probability for MHC presentation of the shared hsp epitope derived from an exogenous or an endogenous source, respectively, may differ. Second, it has been shown that peptide homologous with minor ami no acid exchanges may bind to the MHC better than the natural eptiope [37], Evidence has even been presented that hsp peptides which differ in one or two amino acid positions from the nominal cognates actively interfere with the immune response to the nominal antigen [38]. Thus, the high but not necessarily full sequence similarity between hsp peptides derived from self, infectious agents or nutriment may crucially influence the final outcome of the anti-hsp response.…”
Section: Cross-reactive Hsp Peptides As Physiological Ingredients Of mentioning
confidence: 99%