binding properties and stoichiometry of the t cell receptor · binding properties and stoichiometry...
TRANSCRIPT
Binding Properties and Stoichiometry of the T Cell
Receptor
Jennifer StoneSummer School on Theoretical and
Experimental ImmunologySeptember 2010
Outline
• T Cell Receptor Complex− Components, Assembly, and Organization
• Ligand binding measurements− Surface Plasmon Resonance− Peptide-MHC Multimers− In Situ 2D Binding Measurements
Outline
• T Cell Receptor Complex− Components, Assembly, and Organization
• Ligand binding measurements− Surface Plasmon Resonance− Peptide-MHC Multimers− In Situ 2D Binding Measurements
Components of the TCR Complex
α βε γδ ε
CD4
LCK
APC
Class II MHC-peptide
α βε γδ ε
CD4
LCK
APC
Class II MHC-peptide
α βε γδ ε
CD8
APC
Class I MHC-peptide
LCK
α βε γδ ε
CD8
APC
Class I MHC-peptide
α βε γδ ε
CD8
APC
Class I MHC-peptide
LCK
T cell recognition of peptide-MHC ligands
Rudolph et. al. Annu Rev Biophys Biomol Struct 2002
Structures of MHC, TCR, and co-receptors
Cochran et. al. Trends Biochem Sci 2001
The T Cell Receptor Complex
No complete structure of the TCR complex has been solved
Stoichiometry and surface expression/distribution of subunits still a subject of study
Assembly of the TCR-CD3 complex.
Wucherpfennig K W et al. Cold Spring Harb Perspect Biol 2010©2010 by Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press
Alarcon et. al. EMBO Rep 2006
Characterization of TCR-CD3 complex from T cells
Early evidence for a Bivalent TCR
Fernandez-Miguel et. al. PNAS 1999
Double TCR-Tg mice
145
83
6050
35 kDa
Early evidence for a Bivalent TCR
Fernandez-Miguel et. al. PNAS 1999
Double TCR-Tg mice
Donor quencing of FITC detection
Model of Bivalent TCR
Fernandez-Miguel et. al. PNAS 1999
MβCD
Schamel et. al. J Exp Med 2005
Cholesterol-dependent TCR multimers
BN-PAGE : proteins labeled with Coomassie Blue G-250
Doesn’t disrupt membrane protein interactions like SDS
Campi et. al. J Exp Med 2005
TCR microclusters are present before activation
Kuhns et. al. PNAS 2010
TCR complex dimerization
Intracellular ErythropoetinReceptor Signaling Domain Dimerization Assay
Outline
• T Cell Receptor Complex− Components, Assembly, and Organization
• Ligand binding measurements− Surface Plasmon Resonance− Peptide-MHC Multimers− In Situ 2D Binding Measurements
de Mol and Fischer, & Schuck and Zhao, Methods Mol Biol, 2010
A+B AB
Issues to be concerned about:
Temperature
Mass Transport artifacts
Surface heterogeneity
Decay of immobilized analyte
Multivalency or aggregation of solution-phase ligand
Affinity ranges:
very high (pM) affinities can be difficult to measure
estimate only above ~50 µM
t½ ranges
qualitative only under 5-10 seconds
extremely long dissociation can be problematic
Surface Plasmon Resonance
][])[]]([[][max
ABkABABAkdtABd
offon−−=
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90-7
-6
-5
-4
-3
t1/2 (s)
KD (M
)
Agonist ▲ Weak Agonist▼ Antagonist
Stone et. al. Immunology 2009
Correlation of binding parameters with stimulatory capacity of interaction
Relatively few peptide-MHC/TCR
interactions measured by SPR
Furthermore, most SPR measurements are taken at 25°C,
while T cell activation occurs at
37°C
T cell activation correlates with KDand t½
Chervin, Stone et. al. J Immunol 2009
Antagonist threshold
1
10
100
0.1
0.01
dEV8
SIYAffi
nity
(KD, µ
M)
Agonist threshold
CD4/CD8 requirement threshold
Optimal activity plateau
dEV8
SIY
Null peptides
Wild-type TCR (2C) High Affinity TCR (2Cm33)
Null peptides
Different Similar
Spectrum of peptide similarity to wild type:
Antigen Specificity Fine Specificity
Antagonist threshold
1
10
100
0.1
0.01
dEV8
SIYAffi
nity
(KD, µ
M)
Agonist threshold
CD4/CD8 requirement threshold
Optimal activity plateau
dEV8
SIY
Null peptides
Wild-type TCR (2C) High Affinity TCR (2Cm33)
Null peptides
Different Similar
Spectrum of peptide similarity to wild type:
Antigen Specificity Fine Specificity
Different Similar
Spectrum of peptide similarity to wild type:
Antigen Specificity Fine Specificity
Stone et. al. Immunology 2009
Correlation of KD with T cell stimulation
Comparison of wild-type and high-affinity TCR
Kinetic Proofreading model
Short t½ would not be predicted to allow full zeta phosphorylation
Longer t½ would be predicted to be fully phosphorylated and cause T cell activation
Jones et. al., J Immunol, 2008
Kersh et. al., Science, 1998
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90-7
-6
-5
-4
-3
t1/2 (s)
KD (M
)
Agonist ▲ Weak Agonist▼ Antagonist
Stone et. al. Immunology 2009
Longer t½ does not always result in better stimulation
Extended t½ results in less potent
stimulation in the case of the OT-1 TCR binding to
OVA(G4)/Kb
Optimal Dwell-time model
Kalergis et. al., Nat Immunol, 2001
Peptide-MHC/TCR interactions with intermediate t½ are the most potent
Based on the hypothesis of serial triggering Valitutti et. al., Nature, 1995
*Cells with engineered TCRs with t½ 100- to 1000-fold longer than wild-type are efficiently and sensitively triggered
Molecular Flexibility (∆Cp)
Rigid body adjustments
Alterations to reach transition state
Alterations to attain fully bound complex
Qi et. al., PNAS, 2006
Molecular Flexibility (∆Cp)
Krogsgaard et. al., Mol Cell, 2003
A
OOO KRTSTHG ln−=∆−∆=∆
aassockRTEa ln−=
ddisskRTEa ln−=
Measure ∆Cp by SPR or Isothermal Titration Calorimetry
)ln()(O
O
p
O
TO
O
p
O
T
O
T TTCTSTTTCHG
OO∆−∆−−∆+∆=∆
Boniface et. al., PNAS, 1999
Molecular Flexibility (∆Cp)
]exp[3
2/1
2
2/1CpBAtt DD ∆−=
Qi et. al., PNAS, 2006
Peptide-MHC Confinement Time
Aleksic, Dushek, et. al. Immunity 2010
Peptide-MHC Confinement Time
Aleksic, Dushek, et. al. Immunity 2010
)k(kkk
T1k
*
on
off
C
*
off
−
−
+==*
*-
-
Peptide-MHC Confinement Time
Aleksic, Dushek, et. al. Immunity 2010
correlation KD-koff
koff
KD
molecular flexibility
molecular flexibility+confinement time
confinement time
Outline
• T Cell Receptor Complex− Components, Assembly, and Organization
• Ligand binding measurements− Surface Plasmon Resonance− Peptide-MHC Multimers− In Situ 2D Binding Measurements
Casalegno-Garduño et. al. Cancer Immunol Immunother 2009
Peptide-MHC Multimers
IgG or Fcfusion (dimer)
Ultimer(hexamer)
Pentamer
X-Link (dimer-octamer)
Streptavidin-linked Tetramer
Cochran et. al. Trends Biochem Sci 2001
Stone et. al. Immunology 2009
KX KX KXKD
Complications:
Relatively high threshold of sensitivity (up to 10% receptors bound)
“Steady state” measurements do not represent a true equilibrium
Binding affected by multiple factors, including co-receptor
*this may be an advantage
Binding of peptide-MHC multimers to T cells
Chervin, Stone et. al. J Immunol 2009
TCR panel with various binding parameters
TCR t½ (s) KD (nM) S51 A 86 15
m33 46 16 Y26 A 50 17 N27βA 33 40 Y49 A 58 47
S51 A/Y48βA 11 540 Y48βA 2 2900 N30βA 3 8200 Y50 A 0.5 7000
2C 0.9 36,000
Chervin, Stone et. al. J Immunol 2009
Peptide-MHC tetramer t½,tet values
Chervin, Stone et. al. J Immunol 2009
Are KD,tet values valid?
Chervin, Stone et. al. J Immunol 2009
Are KD,tet values valid?
Wooldridge et. al. Immunology 2009
TCR KD: 30 80 >250µM
Co-receptor and peptide-MHC tetramers
The effect of CD8 co-
receptor binding on
MHC tetramer
dissociation
Wooldridge et. al. J Biol Chem 2005
Outline
• T Cell Receptor Complex− Components, Assembly, and Organization
• Ligand binding measurements− Surface Plasmon Resonance− Peptide-MHC Multimers− In Situ 2D Binding Measurements
Toletino et. al. Biophys J 2008
2D Rates of binding and diffusionFRAP: Fluorescence Recovery After Photobleaching
Wu et. al. Biophys J 2008
lipid only
CD2: CD58
CD16aGPI
-RbIgG
2D Rates of binding and diffusion
Wu et. al. Biophys J 2008
2D Rates of binding and diffusion
Rapid initial phase of recovery due to diffusion of unbound molecules
Slower second phase of recovery due to unbinding, diffusion, and re-binding for reaction-limited kinetics
1.4x1041.4x1061.20.1405In vitroIn situIn vitroIn situIn vitroIn situ
KD (µM) t½ (s-1) kon (M-1s-1)
Huppa et. al. Nature 2010
2D Rates of binding and diffusionIn Situ FRET: Fluorescence Resonance Energy Transfer
Huang et. al. Nature 2010
mrmlAcKa and koff Ackon = AcKa×koff
2D Rates of binding and diffusionIn Situ Cell Adhesion Assay – controlled contact time and area
Huang et. al. Nature 2010
Correlation of 2D Binding Parameters with T Cell
Recognition
2D off-rates up to 8300-fold
faster than 3D off-rates
Broader dynamic range of values seen
Reference List• Rudolph MG, Luz JG, Wilson IA. Structural and thermodynamic correlates of T cell signaling. Annu Rev Biophys Biomol
Struct. 2002;31:121-49.
• Cochran JR, Aivazian D, Cameron TO, Stern LJ. Receptor clustering and transmembrane signaling in T cells. Trends BiochemSci. 2001 May;26(5):304-10.
• Wucherpfennig KW, Gagnon E, Call MJ, Huseby ES, Call ME. Structural biology of the T-cell receptor: insights into receptor assembly, ligand recognition, and initiation of signaling. Cold Spring Harb Perspect Biol. 2010 Apr 1;2(4):a005140.
• Alarcón B, Swamy M, van Santen HM, Schamel WW. T-cell antigen-receptor stoichiometry: pre-clustering for sensitivity.EMBO Rep. 2006 May;7(5):490-5.
• Fernández-Miguel G, Alarcón B, Iglesias A, Bluethmann H, Alvarez-Mon M, Sanz E, de la Hera A. Multivalent structure of an alphabetaT cell receptor. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 1999 Feb 16;96(4):1547-52.
• Schamel WW, Arechaga I, Risueño RM, van Santen HM, Cabezas P, Risco C, Valpuesta JM, Alarcón B. Coexistence of multivalent and monovalent TCRs explains high sensitivity and wide range of response. J Exp Med. 2005 Aug 15;202(4):493-503.
• Campi G, Varma R, Dustin ML. Actin and agonist MHC-peptide complex-dependent T cell receptor microclusters as scaffolds for signaling. J Exp Med. 2005 Oct 17;202(8):1031-6.
• Kuhns MS, Girvin AT, Klein LO, Chen R, Jensen KD, Newell EW, Huppa JB, Lillemeier BF, Huse M, Chien YH, Garcia KC, Davis MM. Evidence for a functional sidedness to the alphabetaTCR. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2010 Mar 16;107(11):5094-9.
• de Mol NJ, Fischer MJ. Surface plasmon resonance: a general introduction. Methods Mol Biol. 2010;627:1-14.
• Schuck P, Zhao H. The role of mass transport limitation and surface heterogeneity in the biophysical characterization of macromolecular binding processes by SPR biosensing. Methods Mol Biol. 2010;627:15-54.
• Stone JD, Chervin AS, Kranz DM. T-cell receptor binding affinities and kinetics: impact on T-cell activity and specificity. Immunology. 2009 Feb;126(2):165-76.
• Kersh EN, Shaw AS, Allen PM. Fidelity of T cell activation through multistep T cell receptor zeta phosphorylation. Science.1998 Jul 24;281(5376):572-5.
• Jones LL, Colf LA, Stone JD, Garcia KC, Kranz DM. Distinct CDR3 conformations in TCRs determine the level of cross-reactivity for diverse antigens, but not the docking orientation. J Immunol. 2008 Nov 1;181(9):6255-64.
• Valitutti S, Müller S, Cella M, Padovan E, Lanzavecchia A. Serial triggering of many T-cell receptors by a few peptide-MHC complexes. Nature. 1995 May 11;375(6527):148-51.
• Kalergis AM, Boucheron N, Doucey MA, Palmieri E, Goyarts EC, Vegh Z, Luescher IF, Nathenson SG. Efficient T cell activation requires an optimal dwell-time of interaction between the TCR and the pMHC complex. Nat Immunol. 2001 Mar;2(3):229-34.
Reference List• Qi S, Krogsgaard M, Davis MM, Chakraborty AK. Molecular flexibility can influence the stimulatory ability of receptor-ligand
interactions at cell-cell junctions. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2006 Mar 21;103(12):4416-21.
• Boniface JJ, Reich Z, Lyons DS, Davis MM. Thermodynamics of T cell receptor binding to peptide-MHC: evidence for a general mechanism of molecular scanning. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 1999 Sep 28;96(20):11446-51.
• Krogsgaard M, Prado N, Adams EJ, He XL, Chow DC, Wilson DB, Garcia KC, Davis MM. Evidence that structural rearrangements and/or flexibility during TCR binding can contribute to T cell activation. Mol Cell. 2003 Dec;12(6):1367-78.
• Aleksic M, Dushek O, Zhang H, Shenderov E, Chen JL, Cerundolo V, Coombs D, van der Merwe PA. Dependence of T cell antigen recognition on T cell receptor-peptide MHC confinement time. Immunity. 2010 Feb 26;32(2):163-74.
• Chervin AS, Stone JD, Holler PD, Bai A, Chen J, Eisen HN, Kranz DM. The impact of TCR-binding properties and antigen presentation format on T cell responsiveness. J Immunol. 2009 Jul 15;183(2):1166-78.
• Wooldridge L, Lissina A, Cole DK, van den Berg HA, Price DA, Sewell AK. Tricks with tetramers: how to get the most from multimeric peptide-MHC. Immunology. 2009 Feb;126(2):147-64.
• Wooldridge L, van den Berg HA, Glick M, Gostick E, Laugel B, Hutchinson SL, Milicic A, Brenchley JM, Douek DC, Price DA, Sewell AK. Interaction between the CD8 coreceptor and major histocompatibility complex class I stabilizes T cell receptor-antigen complexes at the cell surface. J Biol Chem. 2005 Jul 29;280(30):27491-501.
• Tolentino TP, Wu J, Zarnitsyna VI, Fang Y, Dustin ML, Zhu C. Measuring diffusion and binding kinetics by contact area FRAP. Biophys J. 2008 Jul;95(2):920-30.
• Wu J, Fang Y, Zarnitsyna VI, Tolentino TP, Dustin ML, Zhu C. A coupled diffusion-kinetics model for analysis of contact-area FRAP experiment. Biophys J. 2008 Jul;95(2):910-9.
• Huppa JB, Axmann M, Mörtelmaier MA, Lillemeier BF, Newell EW, Brameshuber M, Klein LO, Schütz GJ, Davis MM. TCR-peptide-MHC interactions in situ show accelerated kinetics and increased affinity. Nature. 2010 Feb 18;463(7283):963-7.
• Huang J, Zarnitsyna VI, Liu B, Edwards LJ, Jiang N, Evavold BD, Zhu C. The kinetics of two-dimensional TCR and pMHCinteractions determine T-cell responsiveness. Nature. 2010 Apr 8;464(7290):932-6.