Search

Abstract: Engineered receptor fragments and glycoprotein ligands employed in different assay formats have been used to dissect the basis for the dramatic enhancement of binding of two model membrane receptors, dendritic cell-specific intercellular adhesion molecule 3-grabbing nonintegrin (DC-SIGN) and the macrophage galactose lectin, to glycoprotein ligands compared to simple sugars. These approaches make it possible to quantify the importance of two major factors that combine to enhance the affinity of single carbohydrate-recognition domains (CRDs) for glycoprotein ligands by 100-to 300-fold. First, the presence of extended binding sites within a single CRD can enhance interaction with branched glycans, resulting in increases of fivefold to 20-fold in affinity. Second, presentation of glycans on a glycoprotein surface increases affinity by 15-to 20-fold, possibly due to low-specificity interactions with the surface of the protein or restriction in the conformation of the glycans. In contrast, when solution-phase networking is avoided, enhancement due to binding of multiple branches of a glycan to multiple CRDs in the oligomeric forms of these receptors is minimal and binding of a receptor oligomer to multiple glycans on a single glycoprotein makes only a twofold contribution to overall affinity. Thus, in these cases, multivalent interactions of individual glycoproteins with individual receptor oligomers have a limited role in achieving high affinity. These findings, combined with considerations of membrane receptor geometry, are consistent with the idea that further enhancement of the binding to multivalent glycoprotein ligands requires interaction of multiple receptor oligomers with the ligands. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

A6 and B7 are two αβ T cell receptors (TCRs) that recognize the Tax peptide presented by the class I major histocompatibility molecule HLA-A2 (Tax/HLA-A2). Despite the fact that the two TCRs have different CDR loops and use different amino acid residues to contact their ligand, both receptors bind ligand with similar diagonal orientations. Here we show that they also bind with very similar binding affinities and kinetics (the ΔΔG° for binding is approximately 0.3kcal/mol at 25°C). The two receptors respond similarly to alterations in the MHC molecule, yet differ dramatically in their responses to ionic strength and temperature. The different responses to temperature indicate markedly different binding thermodynamics, which are not predictable from the surface area buried in the interfaces. A6 and B7 thus represent two TCRs that are both compatible with Tax/HLA-A2, although compatibility has been achieved through the use of different thermodynamic strategies. Finally, neither A6 nor B7 are predicted to undergo large conformational adaptations upon binding, distinguishing them from a number of other TCRs whose structure, thermodynamics, and kinetics have been characterized. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Abstract: Although T cell receptor cross-reactivity is a fundamental property of the immune system and is implicated in numerous autoimmune pathologies, the molecular mechanisms by which T cell receptors can recognize and respond to diverse ligands are incompletely understood. In the current study we examined the response of the human T cell lymphotropic virus-1 (HTLV-1) Tax-specific T cell receptor (TCR) A6 to a panel of structurally distinct haptens coupled to the Tax 11-19 peptide with a lysine substitution at position 5 (Tax5K, LLFG[K-hapten]PVYV). The A6 TCR could cross-reactively recognize one of these haptenated peptides, Tax-5K-4-(3-Indolyl)-butyric acid (IBA), presented by HLA-A*0201. The crystal structures of Tax5K-IBA/HLA-A2 free and in complex with A6 reveal that binding is mediated by a mechanism of cooperative conformational plasticity involving conformational changes on both sides of the protein–protein interface, including the TCR complementarity determining region (CDR) loops, Vα/Vβ domain orientation, and the hapten-modified peptide. Our findings illustrate the complex role that protein dynamics can play in TCR cross-reactivity and highlight that T cell receptor recognition of ligand can be achieved through diverse and complex molecular mechanisms that can occur simultaneously in the interface, not limited to molecular mimicry and CDR loop shifts. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

T cell receptor (TCR) recognition of peptide takes place in the context of the major histocompatibility complex (MHC) molecule, which accounts for approximately two-thirds of the peptide/MHC buried surface. Using the class I MHC HLA-A2 and a large panel of mutants, we have previously shown that surface mutations that disrupt TCR recognition vary with the identity of the peptide. The single exception is Lys66 on the HLA-A2 α1 helix, which when mutated to alanine disrupts recognition for 93% of over 250 different T cell clones or lines, independent of which peptide is bound. Thus, Lys66 could serve as a peptide-independent TCR binding determinant. Here, we have examined the role of Lys66 in TCR recognition of HLA-A2 in detail. The structure of a peptide/HLA-A2 molecule with the K66A mutation indicates that although the mutation induces no major structural changes, it results in the exposure of a negatively charged glutamate (Glu63) underneath Lys66. Concurrent replacement of Glu63 with glutamine restores TCR binding and function for T cells specific for five different peptides presented by HLA-A2. Thus, the positive charge on Lys66 does not serve to guide all TCRs onto the HLA-A2 molecule in a manner required for productive signaling. Furthermore, electrostatic calculations indicate that Lys66 does not contribute to the stability of two TCR-peptide/HLA-A2 complexes. Our findings are consistent with the notion that each TCR arrives at a unique solution of how to bind a peptide/MHC, most strongly influenced by the chemical and structural features of the bound peptide. This would not rule out an intrinsic affinity of TCRs for MHC molecules achieved through multiple weak interactions, but for HLA-A2 the collective mutational data place limits on the role of any single MHC amino acid side-chain in driving TCR binding in a peptide-independent fashion. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]