By
From the * Basel Institute for Immunology, 4005 Basel, Switzerland; and the Department of
Pathology and Immunology, Monash Medical School, Prahran, Victoria 3181, Australia
![]() |
Abstract |
---|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
---|
Antagonist peptides inhibit T cell responses by an unknown mechanism. By coexpressing two
independent T cell receptors (TCRs) on a single T cell hybridoma, we addressed the question
of whether antagonist ligands induce a dominant-negative signal that inhibits the function of a
second, independent TCR. The two receptors, V2V
5 and V
2V
10, restricted by H-2Kb
and specific for the octameric peptides SIINFEKL and SSIEFARL, respectively, were coexpressed on the same cell. Agonist stimulation demonstrated that the two receptors behaved independently with regard to antigen-induced TCR downregulation and intracellular biochemical signaling. The exposure of one TCR (V
2V
5) to antagonist peptides could not inhibit a
second independent TCR (V
2V
10) from responding to its antigen. Thus, our data clearly
demonstrate that these antagonist ligands do not generate a dominant-negative signal which affects the responsiveness of the entire cell. In addition, a kinetic analysis showed that even 12 h
after engagement with their cognate antigen and 10 h after reaching a steady-state of TCR internalization, T cells were fully inhibited by the addition of antagonist peptides. The window
of susceptibility to antagonist ligands correlated exactly with the time required for the responding T cells to commit to interleukin 2 production. The data support a model where antagonist
ligands can competitively inhibit antigenic peptides from productively engaging the TCR.
This competitive inhibition is effective during the entire commitment period, where sustained
TCR engagement is essential for full T cell activation.
![]() |
Introduction |
---|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
---|
Tcell activation depends on the specific recognition of peptides presented in the binding groove of MHC molecules (1, 2). The binding of the peptide/MHC ligand to the TCR leads to the tyrosine phosphorylation of TCR-associated proteins, recruitment of kinases and adapters, and activation of intracellular signaling pathways (3). Interestingly, T cells can differentially respond to subtle changes in either the MHC or peptide ligand. Substitutions in TCR contact residues can give rise to antagonist ligands that do not elicit any measurable T cell effector functions, but are able to diminish or even abrogate the response to the nominal antigen when both the agonist and antagonist are simultaneously displayed on APCs (7).
Various models have been proposed to explain the mechanistic basis for the differential response to antagonist ligands by the same TCR and its translation into altered signaling and T cell activation (12). First, a quantitative model has been put forward which proposes that TCR antagonism is due to the fact that antagonist ligands interact nonproductively with the TCR, and competitively inhibit antigenic ligands from productively engaging the TCR. This competition might disturb the formation of necessary signaling oligomers (7, 12, 17). This model is supported by studies showing that several antagonist ligands fail to induce TCR-dependent signaling events such as the generation of sustained Ca2+ flux and turnover of the inositol phosphates (7, 9, 17, 20) as well as exhibit lower affinities and faster off-rate kinetics for the TCR than antigenic ligands (23).
In contrast, various qualitative models have been proposed where antagonist ligands induce a TCR-mediated differential (8, 9, 16, 21, 26) or even negative signal (13, 14, 29, 30). One model attributes the induction of a negative signal to an inappropriate conformational change induced by antagonist ligands (14, 31). In contrast, another model proposes that quantitative differences in TCR/ ligand binding translate into a negative intracellular signal (29). Studies of positive selection of immature thymocytes by antagonist ligands in fetal thymic organ culture have shown that these ligands are in fact capable of delivering a signal through the TCR (32). Moreover, several groups have demonstrated that altered peptide ligands, with partial agonist or with even pure antagonist properties, were able to initiate some but not all of the early biochemical events associated with TCR signaling (26). Although these experiments provided evidence for the induction of differential signaling events induced by partial agonist and antagonist ligands, they were not able to distinguish whether the observed inhibitory effect was due to an induced negative signal or to incomplete activation based on the faster TCR dissociation from the antagonist/MHC complex (24, 25).
In the present study, we have addressed the mechanism of antagonism induced by antagonist ligands using T cell hybridomas coexpressing two independent TCRs. If antagonist ligands induced signals with negative regulatory characteristics, then stimulation through one receptor should be inhibitable by antagonizing the other. Our data clearly demonstrate that the antagonist ligands we examined do not generate such an intracellular dominant-negative signal which inhibits the stimulation of a second independent TCR. The two TCRs, expressed on the same cell, behaved independently with regard to antigen-induced TCR internalization as well as intracellular biochemical signaling. Interestingly, the T cell hybridoma could be inhibited by antagonist peptides far beyond the time point of maximal antigen-induced TCR internalization. The fact that the window of sensitivity to antagonist peptides correlated exactly with the time required for the cells to commit to activation supports a competitive model to explain TCR antagonism.
![]() |
Materials and Methods |
---|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
---|
DNA Constructs.
The OVA-TCR-1 (OT-I) is comprised of rearranged TCRCells.
The TCR-Transfection and Infection.
Bosc23 packaging cell line was transfected as described previously (44). The supernatant containing retroviral particles was used to infect the 58 T cell hybridoma. Briefly, 5 × 105 58 cells were resuspended in 100 µl IMDM, and 1 ml retroviral supernatant containing 40 µg DEAE-dextran was added. After 6-12 h, 5 ml of fresh IMDM and the appropriate selective drug was added (1 mg/ml G418 [GIBCO BRL], 3 µg/ml puromycin [Sigma Chemie], 2 mM histidinol [Sigma Chemie], or 0.5 mg/ml hygromycin [Calbiochem]). The surviving cells were analyzed after 5-7 d and sorted for surface expression by FACS®. In all experiments at least two independently generated T cell hybridoma lines were compared, and similar results were obtained. Transfected cells were always maintained in medium containing the selective drugs.Peptides.
The peptides were synthesized at the Basel Institute for Immunology using FastMocTM chemistry on 430A peptide synthesizer (Applied Biosystems). The amino acid sequences were the following: SIINFEKL (VAntibodies.
The anti-VQuantitation of TCR Surface Expression.
To calculate the relative amount of the two TCRs (VStimulation Assays.
90 µl containing 5 × 104 P1.32Kb cells was plated in flat-bottomed 96-well plates and incubated with 10 µl peptide for 4 h at 37°C. 8 × 104 T hybridoma cells in 100 µl medium were subsequently added. After a further 25 h of incubation at 37°C, the supernatant was harvested and assayed for IL-2.Antagonism Assays.
P1.32Kb cells were first loaded for 4 h at 37°C with the indicated amount of agonist peptide and unbound peptide was removed by washing. Peptide loaded cells (5 × 104/ 90 µl) were plated in flat-bottom 96-well plates. 10 µl of antagonist peptides, or 10 µl of control peptide or medium alone was added and the cultures were incubated at 37°C for 1 h. 8 × 106 T hybridoma cells in 100 µl were then added and incubated for 25- 27 h at 37°C. The supernatant was harvested and analyzed for the presence of IL-2.IL-2 Assay.
IL-2 content was determined by incubating 2 × 103 HT-2 cells per well in round-bottom 96-well plates with serial dilutions of culture supernatant for 24 h. Alamar blue substrate (Alamar Biosciences) was then added and IL-2 titer was determined by comparison to a standard curve generated using recombinant murine IL-2 (PharMingen) using SOFTmaxPro version 1.1 software.FACS® Analysis of TCR Downregulation.
The stimulation of the T cell hybridomas was carried out in parallel and under the same conditions as the antagonism assays mentioned above. To ensure conjugate formation, cells were centrifuged briefly. Similar results were obtained with round- or flat-bottom 96-well plates. After 3 h of stimulation at 37°C, cells were washed once in PBS containing 1% FCS and 0.05% azide, and stained with saturating amounts of PE-conjugated anti-VTyrosine Phosphorylation Assays.
For antigen presentation, the cell line P1.32Kb was loaded either with medium alone or with antigenic peptides, 10 µM SSIEFARL or 1 µM SIINFEKL, in a 24-well plate overnight (7.5 × 105 cells/well in 1 ml 1.5% FCS IMDM). 107 responding T cell hybridomas were then added to each well and incubated at 37°C for 30 min. Cells were harvested and cell pellets were lysed for 20 min in 1 ml of 1% Triton X-100, 10 mM Tris-NCl, pH 7.4, and 150 mM NaCl. To prevent degradation, the lysis buffer was supplemented with 10 mM NaF, 1 mM PMSF, 10 µg/ml aprotinin, 10 µg/ml leupeptin, 1 mM orthovanadate, and 100 µM pervanadate (made from a fresh stock solution of 10 nM orthovanadate and 15 mM H2O2). Cell lysates were immunoprecipitated with anti-VAnti- Blot.
![]() |
Results |
---|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
---|
To investigate the mechanism of TCR antagonism, we took advantage of the T cell hybridoma line,
58CD/
TCR-
/
, which expresses the coreceptor
CD8 but no endogenous TCR (41; see Materials and
Methods). Using retroviral vectors, we transduced the
cDNAs encoding the V
2V
5 TCR, which is known as
OT-I. This TCR specifically recognizes the ovalbumin
peptide, SIINFEKL, bound to the MHC class I molecule
Kb (9). Two antagonist peptides, E1 and P7, differing by
only one residue from the antigenic peptide, have been described for this TCR (32). Optimal activation of the
V
2V
5 expressing hybridomas, measured by the secretion of IL-2 or IL-3 and TCR internalization, required
high expression of both CD8
and CD8
, (52; and data not shown).
The agonist peptide was prepulsed onto the APC to ensure antigen binding as previously described for conventional antagonism assays (9). Antagonism was observed
with similar characteristics described for T cell clones (Fig.
1). The V2V
5 expressing cells responded to the antigenic peptide SIINFEKL by secreting IL-2 and IL-3 in an
antigen dose-dependent fashion and the presence of the antagonist peptides, E1 and P7, inhibited IL-2 and IL-3 production at suboptimal SIINFEKL concentrations (Fig. 1 A
[IL-3 data not shown]). This inhibition of the response was
specific for the antagonist peptides since a control MHC
Kb-binding peptide, K4, neither inhibited nor potentiated
the IL-2 response elicited by the peptide SIINFEKL alone
(Fig. 1 A).
|
Functionally triggered TCRs are internalized shortly after stimulation. Thus, downregulation of TCRs after exposure to the antigenic peptide, SIINFEKL, was used as a
measure for productive TCR engagement (53, 54). As
shown in Fig. 1 B, up to 75% of V2V
5 TCRs were
downregulated in a dose-dependent fashion after 3 h of antigen exposure. Neither antagonist peptides alone nor the
control peptide K4 affected TCR expression (Fig. 1 B, see arrow). However, both antagonist peptides, E1 and P7,
modestly inhibited (by 10%) TCR downregulation induced by the antigen, SIINFEKL. Although the reversal of
TCR internalization correlated with the inhibition of IL-2
secretion (Fig. 1, A and B), the effect on IL-2 secretion was
more pronounced. Surprisingly, the number of internalized
TCRs did not necessarily correlate with the amount of secreted IL-2. This was particularly evident when the response to 1 nM SIINFEKL was antagonized by 10 µM E1
or P7 (compare A and B in Fig. 1 and in Fig. 5). Under
these conditions, TCR downregulation was not inhibited,
although a significant decrease in IL-2 secretion was observed. These results suggest that in this system there is
no strict correlation between the inhibition of antigen-
induced TCR internalization and the effect on the IL-2 response.
|
To test the hypothesis that antagonist ligands induce intracellular, dominant-negative signals, we generated a T cell hybridoma line expressing two
TCRs, which could be independently activated. This experimental design was used to determine whether positive signals derived from an antigen-stimulated TCR could be
blocked by putative inhibitory signals generated by a second, antagonized TCR (Fig. 2). One receptor is the
V2V
5 TCR, which is specific for the antigenic peptide,
SIINFEKL, and which can be antagonized by the altered
peptides, E1 and P7 (32; Fig. 1). The V
2 chain is also
present in the second receptor but is paired instead with a
V
10 chain. This second TCR is specific for a Herpes simplex viral peptide, SSIEFARL, also presented by Kb (40).
|
Since the two receptors differ only in their TCR chains, no hybrid receptors of unknown specificities can be
formed and the two receptors can easily be followed with
V
-specific antibodies. Therefore, all observed effects can
be clearly attributed to the respective receptor.
First, we determined
whether the two receptors, which have a common TCR chain, are specific for their respective antigenic peptides. T
cell hybridomas expressing only one type of TCR, either V
2V
5 or V
2V
10, were analyzed for their IL-2 response in stimulation assays. As shown in Fig. 3 A, V
2V
5
expressing cells responded only to the antigen, SIINFEKL,
while V
2V
10 expressing cells were stimulated only by
the peptide SSIEFARL (Fig. 3 B). Neither of these TCRs
was stimulated by the antagonist peptides, E1 and P7, or
by the control peptide, K4 (Fig. 3, A and B). Moreover, TCR internalization completely correlated with the IL-2
responsiveness (data not shown).
|
A reduced IL-2 response to SSIEFARL compared to
SIINFEKL (Fig. 3) was observed. However, this difference
could not be attributed either to different TCR expression
levels or to differences in the ability of these antigens to
bind Kb. The binding affinities of the peptides to Kb, indirectly measured by their abilities to stabilize Kb expression
on RMA-S cells, were equivalent (data not shown). The
lower IL-2 response, induced by the SSIEFARL peptide,
was likely due to weak interactions of the V2V
10 TCR
with this peptide/MHC complex. Nevertheless, the IL-2
production in response to SSIEFARL demonstrated that
the V
2V
10 TCR was functional.
To determine if the V2V
5-specific antagonists, E1
and P7, could antagonize the V
2V
10 TCR directly,
cells expressing only the V
2V
10 receptor were stimulated with the cognate antigen, SSIEFARL, in the presence
of the V
2V
5-specific antagonist peptides, E1 and P7, or
the control peptide, K4. None of the peptides inhibited the
IL-2 response to SSIEFARL (Fig. 4 A) or the downregulation of the V
2V
10 receptor (Fig. 4 B). These results
showed that the antagonists of the V
2V
5 TCR did not
cross-react with the V
2V
10 receptor.
|
Having
confirmed the specificity of the two TCRs expressed on
separate hybridomas, both receptors were expressed on the
same cell. Two-color FACS® analysis with anti-V antibodies was used to calculate that V
2V
5 and V
2V
10
comprised 60 and 40% of the surface TCRs, respectively (data not shown). Stimulation of the double TCR expressing cells with either the V
2V
5- or V
2V
10-specific
antigen resulted in a low but reproducible IL-2 response
(Fig. 5, A and C). Thus, both TCRs were functional when
expressed at the surface of the same cell. An antagonist assay was performed by stimulating the dual expressing hybridoma cells with the V
2V
5 antigen SIINFEKL, in the
presence of the V
2V
5-specific antagonists E1 or P7.
Both antagonist peptides, but not the control peptide K4,
inhibited IL-2 expression in the dual TCR expressing cells
(Fig. 5 A). Additionally, the antigen-induced TCR internalization of V
2V
5 receptor was slightly inhibited in the
presence of the antagonists E1 and P7 similar to what was
observed previously (Fig. 5 B and Fig. 1 B).
To test the hypothesis that antagonist ligands deliver a
negative, trans-acting signal, the double receptor expressing
cells were stimulated with the V2V
10-specific antigen,
SSIEFARL, in the presence of the V
2V
5-specific antagonist peptides E1 or P7. The IL-2 response to SSIEFARL,
mediated by the V
2V
10 TCR was unaffected in the
presence of the V
2V
5-specific antagonist peptides E1 or
P7 (Fig. 5 C). Furthermore, the V
2V
5-specific antagonists did not reverse the downregulation of the V
2V
10 TCR (Fig. 5 D).
The results clearly show that antagonizing one TCR did not inhibit the stimulation through a second, independent TCR. Apparently, these antagonist ligands do not induce a dominant-negative signal that acts in trans.
Antigen-engaged TCRs Function Independently in Their Proximal Signaling Pathways.Since the antagonized V2V
5
TCR did not interfere with the response of the stimulated
V
2V
10 TCR, we investigated the functional independence of the two receptors. To find out if both receptors function independently, both TCRs were monitored for
antigen-induced TCR internalization. The stimulation
with the V
2V
5-specific antigen, SIINFEKL, resulted in
downregulation of the V
2V
5 TCR but not of the
V
2V
10 TCR (Fig. 6 A). Similarly, in response to the
V
2V
10-specific antigen, SSIEFARL, the V
2V
10 receptor was downregulated, while no internalization of the
V
2V
5 receptor was detectable (Fig. 6 B). Similar results
were obtained when various cell populations expressing
different ratios of the two TCRs were used (not shown),
supporting the observations of Valitutti et al. examining T
cell clones with disparate expression of the two TCRs (53).
|
To address whether two different TCRs expressed on
the surface of the same cell also behave independently in
regard to biochemical signaling, T cell hybridomas expressing the two TCRs were incubated with unpulsed APCs or
APCs pulsed with either the V2V
10-specific antigen,
SSIEFARL, or the V
2V
5-specific antigen, SIINFEKL.
From cell lysates, both TCRs were either immunoprecipitated with an anti-CD3
mAb, or independently retrieved
using anti-V
5- or anti-V
10-specific mAbs. Immunoprecipitates were resolved by SDS-PAGE and blotted for the
presence of phosphorylated tyrosine residues. Only low background phosphorylation of TCR-associated proteins was
observed in T cell hybridomas exposed to unpulsed APCs
(Fig. 6 C, lanes 1-3). In contrast, incubation with APCs
pulsed with 10 µM SSIEFARL induced a strong phosphorylation of various proteins which coimmunoprecipitated with the TCR. In anti-CD3
and anti-V
10 immunoprecipitates, tyrosine-phosphorylated isoforms of
(p21 and
p23), CD3
, ZAP-70, and a 36-kD phosphoprotein, most
probably LAT, were observed (Fig. 6 C, lanes 4 and 6). To test for the phosphorylation of unstimulated bystander
TCRs, the V
2V
5 complex was immunoprecipitated
from lysates of cells which had been stimulated with the
V
2V
10-specific antigen, SSIEFARL. There was no detectable induction of phosphorylation of any protein species
precipitated with the V
2V
5 TCR complex (Fig. 6 C,
lane 5). Similar results were obtained with the reverse experiment. In stimulations with 1 µM of the V
2V
5-specific antigen, SIINFEKL, only anti-CD3
and anti-V
5 immunoprecipitates showed the induction of phospho-
(p21
and p23), CD3
, ZAP-70, and the 36-kD phosphoprotein (Fig. 6 C, lanes 7 and 8). Immunoprecipitation of the bystander TCR, V
2V
10, did not coprecipitate any of the
same phosphorylated proteins (Fig. 6 C, lane 9). As the subsequent decoration of the same blot with anti-
showed,
both anti-V
-specific antibodies immunoprecipitated similar amounts of
. The anti-CD3
mAb was sixfold more efficient in coprecipitating
than both V
-specific mAb (Fig.
6 C, bottom).
To determine the sensitivity of detection, the eluate of
cells stimulated with 10 µM antigenic peptide was serially
diluted (twofold) to determine the detection limits of the
phosphoproteins (data not shown). These experiments
showed that as little as 5% of the phosphorylated (shown
in Fig. 6 C, lane 4) could be detected. Thus, the biochemical activation of bystander TCRs is very limited, if it occurs at all. The combined results demonstrate that the two
TCRs expressed on the same cell are biochemically and
functionally independent.
Since antagonist ligands do not induce a dominant-negative signal, antagonist peptides may outcompete agonist peptides for interaction with the TCR. As shown in Fig. 1 B antagonist ligands only slightly inhibited the antigen-induced TCR downregulation. In fact, the extent of TCR internalization in the presence of antagonist peptides did not reflect the profound inhibition of IL-2 secretion observed (Fig. 1). To assess whether antagonist peptides perturb T cell stimulation by affecting the kinetics of agonist-induced TCR downregulation, we monitored TCR internalization over time (Fig. 7). Antagonist peptides affected the extent but not the kinetics of antigen- induced TCR internalization. The full extent of TCR downregulation was reached after 2-3 h of sustained antigen exposure.
|
To better understand the events
that led to antagonism, the time period when cells are sensitive to antagonist ligands was determined. T cell hybridomas, expressing the single TCR, V2V
5, were stimulated
with the antigenic peptide, SIINFEKL, and antagonist peptides were added at various time points thereafter. The addition of antagonist peptides could fully inhibit the IL-2 response up to 12 h after addition of the antigen, SIINFEKL
(Fig. 8). This effect was peptide-specific as the control peptide, K4, did not abrogate the IL-2 response.
|
To determine whether the time period during which T
cells are susceptible to antagonist ligands overlapped with
the time period required for T cell commitment, the Kb-specific antibody, Y3, was used to specifically block the interaction of the V2V
5 TCR with the SIINFEKL/Kb
complex. The time required for sustained TCR engagement, determined using the blocking antibody, Y3, correlated exactly with the period of susceptibility to antagonist
peptides (Fig. 8). The cells were irreversibly committed to
IL-2 secretion only after 12 h of continuous exposure to
the antigen ligand, in the absence of antagonist peptides or
blocking mAbs.
Thus, antagonist ligands were able to inhibit cellular responses long after the responding T cell had interacted with its cognate antigen and achieved a reduced steady-state level of TCR expression. The T cell was fully sensitive to the inhibitory effects of antagonist ligands until it did not require further engagement with the antigen/MHC complex and was irreversibly committed to respond.
![]() |
Discussion |
---|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
---|
T cell antagonism has been implicated as a potentially important mechanism in T cell activation, thymic development, escape from an antiviral immune response, and autoimmunity. Although the actual mechanism by which antagonists exert their effect is still unresolved, various models seek to explain the paradox of how the recognition of altered peptide/MHC ligands leads to altered T cell responses. Quantitative models postulate that antagonist ligands inhibit T cell responses by competing for TCR engagement with the antigenic peptide. Due to their lower affinity and faster off-rate kinetics of TCR binding (23- 25), antagonists are ineffective in initiating downstream signaling pathways but nevertheless reduce the rate of successful TCR engagements by the antigenic peptide (7, 12, 17, 19, 54, 55). In contrast, qualitative models characterize antagonists as ligands capable of delivering differential (8, 9, 16, 21, 26) or even negative signals to the T cell which subsequently inhibit T cell activation (13, 14, 31).
By coexpressing two TCRs of independent specificity
on the same cell (Fig. 2), we were able to directly address
the issue of whether a dominant-negative signal is induced
by antagonist ligands. If antagonist peptides generate an intracellular dominant-negative signal, downstream from the
site of TCR engagement, then antagonist ligands would be
expected to inhibit the ability of a second, independent
TCR to induce a cellular response. Our experimental system clearly shows that in cells expressing two TCRs, activation through one TCR is not inhibitable by engaging a
second TCR with antagonist ligand (Fig. 5 C). These results are supported by the following observations, that (a)
the antigenic peptide for the V2V
10 TCR, SSIEFARL,
is a weak agonist (whose weak stimulatory capacity is definitely not due to weak MHC binding affinity as determined by RMA-S stabilization, data not shown). Therefore, a weak stimulation through V
2V
10 should have
been easily inhibitable by a putative negative signal through
the V
2V
5 TCR; (b) the ratio of the two TCRs expressed on the same cell favored the signals through the antagonized TCR since V
2V
5, recognizing the antagonist, represented 60% of the TCR on the cell surface; and (c) all
peptides were presented on the same APCs (agonist was
loaded first to ensure its binding to Kb), therefore even a
putative negative signal with only short-range efficacy
should have been detected.
The fact that we observed no functional interference between different TCRs expressed on the same cell and no
bystander TCR downregulation upon antigenic stimulation (Fig. 6, A and B) suggests that these two TCRs function independently, supporting the findings of Valitutti et al.
on T cell clones (53). This is further supported by the biochemical data in hybridomas expressing two TCRs. Phosphorylated and recruited phospho-ZAP-70 were only
coprecipitated from TCRs engaged with their respective
antigen (Fig. 6 C). These experiments argue that the phosphorylation of engaged TCRs does not spread to unengaged TCRs. It remains possible that individual cells expressing two different TCRs are intrinsically able to engage
only one type of TCR. However, the simultaneous exposure of the cells to both antigenic peptides, the V
2V
5-specific SIINFEKL and the V
2V
10-specific SSIEFARL,
presented on the same APC, induced concomitant internalization of both TCRs, indicating that both TCRs are
functional on the same cell (data not shown).
Taken together, our data indicate that these antagonist
ligands do not act by generating dominant-negative signals
which inhibit the response of the entire cell. Therefore, we
favor a quantitative model to explain TCR antagonism.
Antagonist ligands have faster off-rate kinetics for TCR engagement than agonist ligands (23). Thus, antagonist
ligands engage the TCR for a longer time than null peptides, but not long enough to induce the full signaling cascade for activation, as first suggested by the kinetic
proofreading model of McKeithan (18). Although this ineffective engagement does not lead to full activation, it does
generate differential biochemical signals reflected by the
differential phosphorylation patterns of (p21 > p23; reference 28). However, as the data from our experimental system have shown, these differential signals did not represent an
intracellular, negative signal per se. As a consequence of ineffective TCR engagement, antagonist ligands prevent agonist
ligands from serially engaging and triggering enough TCRs
to reach the critical threshold for activation (53). This competition for TCR engagement can be observed in the inhibition of TCR downregulation in the presence of antagonist
ligands (19; Fig. 1 B and Fig. 5 B). Furthermore, the quantitative mechanism of antagonist action also explains the observation that T cell responses are less efficiently inhibited
when antagonists and agonist peptides are presented on different APCs (9; data not shown). Conditions which reduce
the direct competition between agonist and antagonist
ligands reduce the efficiency of TCR antagonism. Antagonist ligands may also influence the reorganization of TCRs which may be required for full activation (55).
Although our data indicate that these antagonist ligands
do not induce an intracellular negative signal, downstream
from TCR engagement, there are potentially some limitations to the interpretation of our results. It is possible that
for some unknown reason, the V2V
10 receptor could
not be inhibited. In this regard, the V
2V
10 TCR induced a strong degree of tyrosine phosphorylation but relatively little IL-2 secretion. This is somewhat surprising with
regard to previously published data where a strong correlation between the degree of tyrosine phosphorylation and
the extent of the functional responses was observed (26, 27,
58, 59). Whether this indicates that the V
2V
10 receptor
is intrinsically incapable of responding to a negative signal is
difficult to know. A reciprocal study using antagonists for
the V
2V
10 TCR and agonist ligands for the V
2V
5
receptor would have been informative, but antagonists for
SSIEFARL (ligand for the V
2V
10 receptor) have not
been identified. It is also possible that antagonist peptides
deliver negative signals which only inhibit other identical
TCRs. If these putative negative signals are cis-limited,
then we would not have been able to detect them using a
second, independent receptor.
It is also theoretically possible that antagonist ligands
generate dysfunctional TCRs, e.g., by inducing a conformation that disables the receptor from further activation.
However, preexposure to antagonist peptides for 4 h alone
did not render the V2V
5 expressing hybridomas cells
unresponsive to further antigenic stimulation (data not
shown), which is in accord with the findings of Preckel et al.
for CD8+ T cell clones (19). Moreover, since the signaling
capacity of a second independent TCR was unaffected, it is
also unlikely that antagonist peptides alter T cell responses
by consuming limited amounts of signaling intermediates.
There are two reports of antagonists that can inhibit T cell responses when present at substoichiometric ratios relative to the antigenic peptide (10, 11). These types of antagonist peptides may not function by competition and conceivably could deliver a negative signal to the responding T cell. Thus, there may be different classes of antagonist peptides that act through different mechanisms. One class that was studied here must be present in molar excess to exert an inhibitory effect and uses a competitive mechanism to inhibit T cell responses. Other classes of TCR antagonists, which are effective at substoichiometric ratios, may work by a dominant-negative mechanism.
Our data also show that neither the extent of inhibition (Fig. 1 B) nor the kinetics (Fig. 7) of TCR internalization fully accounted for the inhibition of IL-2 response in our experimental system. In fact, these data demonstrate that antagonist peptides can fully exert their inhibitory effect well after the initial phase of TCR downregulation, at a stage where there is no further net loss of surface TCRs (Fig. 8). Furthermore, the blocking studies with the anti-Kb antibody, Y3, demonstrated that the time window of susceptibility to antagonism correlated exactly with the time of commitment.
Previous studies have already pointed out the importance of a sustained signal for T cell commitment (60).
Depending upon the amount of available antigen, the type
of APC, the number of adhesion and costimulatory molecules present on the APC, and the state of differentiation of
the responding cell, the length of time required for T cell
commitment varied (63). For the V2V
5 expressing T
cell hybridoma, 12 h of continuous engagement with the
agonist ligand was required for a commitment to IL-2 secretion. On the other hand, internalization of TCRs
reached a steady-state after 2-3 h of antigen exposure (Fig.
7). After this point there may be continued TCR downregulation, but there is no further net loss of TCR from the
cell surface. These data suggest that antagonist peptides
competitively inhibit agonist ligands from productively engaging TCR during the entire commitment period. Therefore, it is conceivable that small changes in the rate of TCR
engagement, integrated over time, may have a significant
impact on the final outcome of T cell activation.
Nevertheless, antagonist as well as partial agonist ligands
induce biochemical signals, which are different from the
signaling events generated by antigenic ligand used over a
broad range of concentrations (28). Altered peptide ligands
have been shown to induce altered phosphorylation of the
chain without stable phosphorylation of CD3
and ZAP-70 (26). That partial agonists induce differential biochemical signaling events as well as a long lived anergy in
CD4+ T cell clones (20, 26, 64) has led some investigators
to postulate that altered peptide ligands generate qualitatively different signals (26). In principle, the anergic state
could result from the consumption of limiting signaling intermediates or from an imbalanced expression of transcription factors (65). Since T cell hybridomas, which are not
IL-2 dependent for their proliferation, were used in these
studies, we could not directly address this issue. Nevertheless, our experiments suggest that the inhibition of IL-2
production, a feature which characterizes most anergic T
cells, is not mediated by a negative signal.
In summary, the data are consistent with the idea that the antagonist ligands studied here do not deliver negative signals, but rather compete with antigenic ligands for TCR engagement. This competition can effectively inhibit T cell responses by reducing the rate of TCR engagement throughout the entire commitment period.
![]() |
Footnotes |
---|
Address correspondence to E. Palmer, Basel Institute for Immunology, Grenzacherstrasse 487, 4005 Basel, Switzerland. Phone: 41-61-605-1277; Fax: 41-61-605-1364; E-mail: palmer{at}bii.ch
Received for publication 18 June 1998 and in revised form 9 November 1998.
The Basel Institute for Immunology was founded and is supported by F. Hoffman-La Roche Ltd., Basel, Switzerland.We thank Claerwen Jones for providing the V10 cDNA, P. Cosson for the cDNAs encoding CD8
and
CD8
, I. Luescher for the APC line, and J. Bluestone for the anti-Kb mAb, Y3. We are grateful to A. Pickert and M. Dessing for cell sorting and B. Pfeiffer for photography. We also thank J. Bluestone for valuable
discussion, and M. Bachmann, J. Bluestone, H. Jacobs, and T. Goebel for reviewing the manuscript.
Abbreviation used in this paper HRPO, horseradish peroxidase.
![]() |
References |
---|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
---|
1. |
Garcia, K.C.,
M. Degano,
R.L. Stanfield,
A. Brunmark,
M.R. Jackson,
P.A. Peterson,
L. Teyton, and
I.A. Wilson.
1996.
An ![]() ![]() |
2. | Garboczi, D.N., P. Ghosh, U. Utz, Q.R. Fan, W.E. Biddison, and D.C. Wiley. 1996. Structure of the complex between human T-cell receptor, viral peptide and HLA-A2. Nature. 384: 134-141 [Medline]. |
3. | Perlmutter, R.M., S.D. Levin, M.W. Appleby, S.J. Anderson, and J. Alberola-Ila. 1993. Regulation of lymphocyte function by protein phosphorylation. Annu. Rev. Immunol. 11: 451-499 [Medline]. |
4. | Chan, A.C., D.M. Desai, and A. Weiss. 1994. The role of protein tyrosine kinases and protein tyrosine phosphatases in T cell antigen receptor signal transduction. Annu. Rev. Immunol. 12: 555-592 [Medline]. |
5. | Wange, R.L., and L.E. Samelson. 1996. Complex complexes: signaling at the TCR. Immunity. 5: 197-205 [Medline]. |
6. | Cantrell, D.. 1996. T cell antigen receptor signal transduction pathways. Annu. Rev. Immunol. 14: 259-274 [Medline]. |
7. | De-Magistris, M.T., J. Alexander, M. Coggeshall, A. Altman, F.C. Gaeta, H.M. Grey, and A. Sette. 1992. Antigen analog-major histocompatibility complexes act as antagonists of the T cell receptor. Cell. 68: 625-634 [Medline]. |
8. | Racioppi, L., F. Ronchese, L.A. Matis, and R.N. Germain. 1993. Peptide-major histocompatibility complex class II complexes with mixed agonist/antagonist properties provide evidence for ligand-related differences in T cell receptor-dependent intracellular signaling. J. Exp. Med. 177: 1047-1060 [Abstract]. |
9. | Jameson, S.C., F.R. Carbone, and M.J. Bevan. 1993. Clone-specific T cell receptor antagonists of major histocompatibility complex class I-restricted cytotoxic T cells. J. Exp. Med. 177: 1541-1550 [Abstract]. |
10. | Klenerman, P., S. Rowland-Jones, S. McAdam, J. Edwards, S. Daenke, D. Lalloo, B. Koppe, W. Rosenberg, D. Boyd, A. Edwards, et al . 1994. Cytotoxic T-cell activity antagonized by naturally occurring HIV-1 Gag variants. Nature. 369: 403-407 [Medline]. |
11. | Bertoletti, A., A. Sette, F.V. Chisari, A. Penna, M. Levrero, M. De-Carli, F. Fiaccadori, and C. Ferrari. 1994. Natural variants of cytotoxic epitopes are T-cell receptor antagonists for antiviral cytotoxic T cells. Nature. 369: 407-410 [Medline]. |
12. | Sette, A., J. Alexander, J. Ruppert, K. Snoke, A. Franco, G. Ishioka, and H.M. Grey. 1994. Antigen analogs/MHC complexes as specific T cell receptor antagonists. Annu. Rev. Immunol. 12: 413-431 [Medline]. |
13. | Jameson, S.C., and M.J. Bevan. 1995. T cell receptor antagonists and partial agonists. Immunity. 2: 1-11 [Medline]. |
14. | Janeway, C.A. Jr.. 1995. Ligands for the T-cell receptor: hard times for avidity models. Immunol. Today. 16: 223-225 [Medline]. |
15. | Kersh, G.J., and P.M. Allen. 1996. Review: essential flexibility in the T-cell recognition of antigen. Nature. 380: 495-498 [Medline]. |
16. | Madrenas, J., and R.N. Germain. 1996. Variant TCR ligands: new insights into the molecular basis of antigen- dependent signal transduction and T-cell activation. Semin. Immunol. 8: 83-101 [Medline]. |
17. | Ruppert, J., J. Alexander, K. Snoke, M. Coggeshall, E. Herbert, D. McKenzie, H.M. Grey, and A. Sette. 1993. Effect of T-cell receptor antagonism on interaction between T cells and antigen-presenting cells and on T-cell signaling events. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA. 90: 2671-2675 [Abstract]. |
18. | McKeithan, T.W.. 1995. Kinetic proofreading in T-cell receptor signal transduction. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA. 92: 5042-5046 [Abstract]. |
19. |
Preckel, T.,
R. Grimm,
S. Martin, and
H. Weltzien.
1997.
Altered hapten ligands antagonize trinitrophenyl-specific cytotoxic T cells and block internalization of hapten-specific
receptors.
J. Exp. Med.
185:
1803-1813
|
20. | Sloan-Lancaster, J., B.D. Evavold, and P.M. Allen. 1993. Induction of T-cell anergy by altered T-cell-receptor ligand on live antigen-presenting cells. Nature. 363: 156-159 [Medline]. |
21. | Sloan-Lancaster, J., T.H. Steinberg, and P.M. Allen. 1996. Selective activation of the calcium signaling pathway by altered peptide ligands. J. Exp. Med. 184: 1525-1530 [Abstract]. |
22. | Bachmann, M.F., S. Mariathasan, D. Bouchard, D.E. Speiser, and P.S. Ohashi. 1997. Four types of Ca2+ signals in naive CD8+ cytotoxic T cells after stimulation with T cell agonists, partial agonists and antagonists. Eur. J. Immunol. 27: 3414-3419 [Medline]. |
23. |
Matsui, K.,
J.J. Boniface,
P. Steffner,
P.A. Reay, and
M.M. Davis.
1994.
Kinetics of T-cell receptor binding to peptide/
I-Ek complexes: correlation of the dissociation rate with
T-cell responsiveness.
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA.
91:
12862-12866
|
24. | Alam, S., P. Travers, J. Wung, W. Nasholds, S. Redpath, S. Jameson, and N. Gascoigne. 1996. T-cell-receptor affinity and thymocyte positive selection. Nature. 381: 616-620 [Medline]. |
25. | Lyons, D., S. Lieberman, J. Hampl, J. Boniface, Y. Chien, L. Berg, and M. Davis. 1996. A TCR binds to antagonist ligands with lower affinities and faster dissociation rates than to agonists. Immunity. 5: 53-61 [Medline]. |
26. | Sloan-Lancaster, J., A.S. Shaw, J.B. Rothbard, and P.M. Allen. 1994. Partial T cell signaling: altered phospho-zeta and lack of zap70 recruitment in APL-induced T cell anergy. Cell. 79: 913-922 [Medline]. |
27. | Madrenas, J., R.L. Wange, J.L. Wang, N. Isakov, L.E. Samelson, and R.N. Germain. 1995. Zeta phosphorylation without ZAP-70 activation induced by TCR antagonists or partial agonists. Science. 267: 515-518 [Medline]. |
28. | Reis e Sousa, C.R., E. Levine, and R. Germain. 1996. Partial signaling by CD8+ T cells in response to antagonist ligands. J. Exp. Med. 184: 149-157 [Abstract]. |
29. |
Rabinowitz, J.D.,
C. Beeson,
D.S. Lyons,
M.M. Davis, and
H.M. McConnell.
1996.
Kinetic discrimination in T-cell activation.
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA.
93:
1401-1405
|
30. |
Racioppi, L.,
G. Matarese,
U. D'Oro,
M. De Pascale,
A.M. Masci,
S. Fontana, and
S. Zappacosta.
1996.
The role of
CD4-Lck in T-cell receptor antagonism: evidence for negative signaling.
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA.
93:
10360-10365
|
31. | Yoon, S., U. Dianzani, K. Bottomly, and C.J. Janeway. 1994. Both high and low avidity antibodies to the T cell receptor can have agonist or antagonist activity. Immunity. 1: 563-569 [Medline]. |
32. | Hogquist, K.A., S.C. Jameson, W.R. Heath, J.L. Howard, M.J. Bevan, and F.R. Carbone. 1994. T cell receptor antagonist peptides induce positive selection. Cell. 76: 17-27 [Medline]. |
33. | Jameson, S.C., K.A. Hogquist, and M.J. Bevan. 1994. Specificity and flexibility in thymic selection. Nature. 369: 750-752 [Medline]. |
34. | Hogquist, K.A., S.C. Jameson, and M.J. Bevan. 1995. Strong agonist ligands for the T cell receptor do not mediate positive selection of functional CD8+ T cells. Immunity. 3: 79-86 [Medline]. |
35. | Kelly, J., S. Sterry, S. Cose, S. Turner, J. Fecondo, S. Rodda, P. Fink, and F. Carbone. 1993. Identification of conserved T cell receptor CDR3 residues contacting known exposed peptide side chains from a major histocompatibility complex class I-bound determinant. Eur. J. Immunol. 23: 3318-3326 [Medline]. |
36. | Miller, A.D., and G.J. Rosman. 1989. Improved retroviral vectors for gene transfer and expression. Biotechniques. 7: 980-990 [Medline]. |
37. | Morgenstern, J.P., and H. Land. 1990. Advanced mammalian gene transfer: high titre retroviral vectors with multiple drug selection markers and a complementary helper-free packaging cell line. Nucleic Acids. Res. 18: 3587-3596 [Abstract]. |
38. | Mullen, C.A., M. Kilstrup, and R.M. Blaese. 1992. Transfer of the bacterial gene for cytosine deaminase to mammalian cells confers lethal sensitivity to 5-fluorocytosine: a negative selection system. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA. 89: 33-37 [Abstract]. |
39. | Bäckström, B.T., E. Milia, A. Peter, B. Jaureguiberry, C.T. Baldari, and E. Palmer. 1996. A motif within the T cell receptor alpha chain constant region connecting peptide domain controls antigen responsiveness. Immunity. 5: 437-447 [Medline]. |
40. | Turner, S.J., S.C. Cose, and F.R. Carbone. 1996. TCR alpha-chain usage can determine antigen-selected TCR beta-chain repertoire diversity. J. Immunol. 157: 4979-4985 [Abstract]. |
41. | Letourneur, F., and B. Malissen. 1989. Derivation of a T cell hybridoma variant deprived of functional T cell receptor alpha and beta chain transcripts reveals a nonfunctional alpha-mRNA of BW5147 origin. Eur. J. Immunol. 19: 2269-2274 [Medline]. |
42. | Wallny, H.J., O. Rotzschke, K. Falk, G. Hammerling, and H.G. Rammensee. 1992. Gene transfer experiments imply instructive role of major histocompatibility complex class I molecules in cellular peptide processing. Eur. J. Immunol. 22: 655-659 [Medline]. |
43. | Watson, J.. 1979. Continuous proliferation of murine antigen-specific helper T lymphocytes in culture. J. Exp. Med. 150: 1510-1519 [Abstract]. |
44. | Bill, J., O. Kanagawa, J. Linten, Y. Utsunomiya, and E. Palmer. 1990. Class I and class II MHC gene products differentially affect the fate of V beta 5 bearing thymocytes. J. Mol. Cell. Immunol. 4: 269-280 [Medline]. |
45. | Leo, O., M. Foo, D.H. Sachs, L.E. Samelson, and J.A. Bluestone. 1987. Identification of a monoclonal antibody specific for a murine T3 polypeptide. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA. 84: 1374-1378 [Abstract]. |
46. |
Rozdzial, M.M.,
R.T. Kubo,
S.L. Turner, and
T.H. Finkel.
1994.
Developmental regulation of the TCR zeta-chain.
Differential expression and tyrosine phosphorylation of the
TCR zeta-chain in resting immature and mature T lymphocytes.
J. Immunol.
153:
1563-1580
|
47. | Pircher, H., N. Rebai, M. Groettrup, C. Gregoire, D.E. Speiser, M.P. Happ, E. Palmer, R.M. Zinkernagel, H. Hengartner, and B. Malissen. 1992. Preferential positive selection of V alpha 2+ CD8+ T cells in mouse strains expressing both H-2k and T cell receptor V alpha a haplotypes: determination with a V alpha 2-specific monoclonal antibody. Eur. J. Immunol. 22: 399-404 [Medline]. |
48. | Necker, A., N. Rebai, M. Matthes, E. Jouvin-Marche, P.A. Cazenave, P. Swarnworawong, E. Palmer, H.R. MacDonald, and B. Malissen. 1991. Monoclonal antibodies raised against engineered soluble mouse T cell receptors and specific for V alpha 8-, V beta 2- or V beta 10-bearing T cells. Eur. J. Immunol. 21: 3035-3040 [Medline]. |
49. | Loken, M.R., and A.M. Stall. 1982. Flow cytometry as an analytical and preparative tool in immunology. J. Immunol. Methods. 50: R85-R112 [Medline]. |
50. | Jones, B., and C.A. Janeway Jr.. 1981. Cooperative interaction of B lymphocytes with antigen-specific helper T lymphocytes is MHC restricted. Nature. 292: 547-549 [Medline]. |
51. | Bolliger, L., B. Johansson, and E. Palmer. 1997. The short extracellular domain of the T cell receptor zeta chain is involved in assembly and signal transduction. Mol. Immunol. 34: 819-827 [Medline]. |
52. |
Renard, V.,
P. Romero,
E. Vivier,
B. Malissen, and
I.F. Luescher.
1996.
CD8 beta increases CD8 coreceptor function and
participation in TCR-ligand binding.
J. Exp. Med.
184:
2439-2444
|
53. | Valitutti, S., S. Muller, M. Cella, E. Padovan, and A. Lanzavecchia. 1995. Serial triggering of many T-cell receptors by a few peptide-MHC complexes. Nature. 375: 148-151 [Medline]. |
54. | Viola, A., S. Linkert, and A. Lanzavecchia. 1997. A T cell receptor (TCR) antagonist competitively inhibits serial TCR triggering by low-affinity ligands, but does not affect triggering by high-affinity anti-CD3 antibodies. Eur. J. Immunol. 27: 3080-3083 [Medline]. |
55. | Bachmann, M.F., M. Salzmann, A. Oxenius, and P.S. Ohashi. 1998. Formation of T cell receptor dimers/trimers as a crucial step for T cell activation. Eur. J. Immunol. 28: 2571-2579 [Medline]. |
56. | Jacobs, H.. 1997. Pre-TCR/CD3 and TCR/CD3 complexes: decamers with differential signalling properties? Immunol. Today. 18: 565-569 [Medline]. |
57. | Monks, C.R., B.A. Freiberg, H. Kupfer, N. Sciaky, and A. Kupfer. 1998. Three-dimensional segregation of supramolecular activation clusters in T cells. Nature. 395: 82-86 [Medline]. |
58. | La Face, D.M., C. Couture, K. Anderson, G. Shih, J. Alexander, A. Sette, T. Mustelin, A. Altman, and H.M. Grey. 1997. Differential T cell signaling induced by antagonist peptide-MHC complexes and the associated phenotypic responses. J. Immunol. 158: 2057-2064 [Abstract]. |
59. |
Hemmer, B.,
I. Stefanova,
M. Vergelli,
R.N. Germain, and
R. Maring.
1998.
Relationships among TCR ligand potency, thresholds for effector function elicitation, and the
quality of early signaling events in human T cells.
J. Immunol.
160:
5807-5814
|
60. | Cantrell, D.A., and K.A. Smith. 1984. The interleukin-2 T-cell system: a new cell growth model. Science. 224: 1312-1316 [Medline]. |
61. |
Weiss, A.,
R. Shields,
M. Newton,
B. Manger, and
J. Imboden.
1987.
Ligand-receptor interactions required for commitment to the activation of the interleukin 2 gene.
J. Immunol.
138:
2169-2176
|
62. | Crabtree, G.R.. 1989. Contingent genetic regulatory events in T lymphocyte activation. Science. 243: 355-361 [Medline]. |
63. | Iezzi, G., and K.Karjalainen, and A. Lanzavecchia. 1998. The duration of antigenic stimulation determines the fate of naive and effector T cells. Immunity. 8: 89-95 [Medline]. |
64. |
Ryan, K.R., and
B.D. Evavold.
1998.
Persistence of peptide-induced CD4+ T cell anergy in vitro.
J. Exp. Med.
187:
89-96
|
65. | Smith, J.A., and J.A. Bluestone. 1997. T cell inactivation and cytokine deviation promoted by anti-CD3 mAbs. Curr. Opin. Immunol. 9: 648-654 [Medline]. |