TCR contact residue hydrophobicity is a hallmark of immunogenic CD8+ T cell epitopes

Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America

Volumn 112, Issue 14, 2015, Pages E1754-E1762

  Chowell, Diego ^a   Krishna, Sri ^a,b   Becker, Pablo D ^c   Cocita, Clément ^c   Shu, Jack ^d   Tan, Xuefang ^d   Greenberg, Philip D ^d   Klavinskis, Linda S ^c   Blattman, Joseph N ^a   Anderson, Karen S ^a  

^a ARIZONA STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b Arizona State University   (United States)

^c KING'S COLLEGE LONDON   (United Kingdom)

^d UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON   (United States)

Author keywords

Epitope prediction; Immunogenicity; MHC class I; Nonself; T cell; Vaccine

Indexed keywords

AMINO ACID; EPITOPE; GAG PROTEIN; MAJOR HISTOCOMPATIBILITY ANTIGEN CLASS 1; T LYMPHOCYTE RECEPTOR; LYMPHOCYTE ANTIGEN RECEPTOR; PROTEIN BINDING;

ANIMAL EXPERIMENT; ARTICLE; CD8+ T LYMPHOCYTE; CONTROLLED STUDY; HUMAN IMMUNODEFICIENCY VIRUS 1; HYDROPHOBICITY; IMMUNOGENICITY; IN VIVO STUDY; MAJOR HISTOCOMPATIBILITY COMPLEX; MOUSE; NONHUMAN; PRIORITY JOURNAL; ADENOVIRIDAE; ALGORITHM; ANIMAL; ANTIGEN PRESENTATION; C57BL MOUSE; CHEMICAL PHENOMENA; CHEMISTRY; CYTOLOGY; GENETICS; HUMAN; IMMUNOLOGY; METABOLISM; PROBABILITY;

HUMAN IMMUNODEFICIENCY VIRUS 1;

ADENOVIRIDAE; ALGORITHMS; AMINO ACIDS; ANIMALS; ANTIGEN PRESENTATION; CD8-POSITIVE T-LYMPHOCYTES; EPITOPES, T-LYMPHOCYTE; GAG GENE PRODUCTS, HUMAN IMMUNODEFICIENCY VIRUS; HUMANS; HYDROPHOBIC AND HYDROPHILIC INTERACTIONS; MAJOR HISTOCOMPATIBILITY COMPLEX; MICE; MICE, INBRED C57BL; PROBABILITY; PROTEIN BINDING; RECEPTORS, ANTIGEN, T-CELL;

EID: 84929659335     PISSN: 00278424     EISSN: 10916490     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1073/pnas.1500973112     Document Type: Article

References (43)

1. Grakoui A, et al. (1999) The immunological synapse: A molecular machine controlling T cell activation. Science 285(5425):221-227.
2. Blum JS, Wearsch PA, Cresswell P (2013) Pathways of antigen processing. Annu Rev Immunol 31:443-473.
3. Hennecke J, Wiley DC (2001) T cell receptor-MHC interactions up close. Cell 104(1):1-4.
4. Purcell AW, McCluskey J, Rossjohn J (2007) More than one reason to rethink the use of peptides in vaccine design. Nat Rev Drug Discov 6(5):404-414.
5. Hogquist K, et al. (1994) T cell receptor antagonist peptides induce positive selection. Cell 76(1):17-27.
6. Medzhitov R, Janeway CA, Jr (2002) Decoding the patterns of self and nonself by the innate immune system. Science 296(5566):298-300.
7. Falk K, Rötzschke O, Stevanovíc S, Jung G, Rammensee H-G (1991) Allele-specific motifs revealed by sequencing of self-peptides eluted from MHC molecules. Nature 351(6324):290-296.
8. Rammensee H, Bachmann J, Emmerich NPN, Bachor OA, Stevanovíc S (1999) SYFPEITHI: Database for MHC ligands and peptide motifs. Immunogenetics 50(3-4):213-219.
9. Kubo RT, et al. (1994) Definition of specific peptide motifs for four major HLA-A alleles. J Immunol 152(8):3913-3924.
10. van der Merwe PA, Dushek O (2011) Mechanisms for T cell receptor triggering. Nat Rev Immunol 11(1):47-55.
11. Honeyman MC, Brusic V, Stone NL, Harrison LC (1998) Neural network-based prediction of candidate T-cell epitopes. Nat Biotechnol 16(10):966-969.
12. Moutaftsi M, et al. (2006) A consensus epitope prediction approach identifies the breadth of murine T(CD8+)-cell responses to vaccinia virus. Nat Biotechnol 24(7):817-819.
13. Nielsen M, et al. (2007) NetMHCpan, a method for quantitative predictions of peptide binding to any HLA-A and-B locus protein of known sequence. PLoS ONE 2(8):e796.
14. Tenzer S, et al. (2005) Modeling the MHC class I pathway by combining predictions of proteasomal cleavage, TAP transport and MHC class I binding. Cell Mol Life Sci 62(9): 1025-1037.
15. Newell EW, et al. (2013) Combinatorial tetramer staining and mass cytometry analysis facilitate T-cell epitope mapping and characterization. Nat Biotechnol 31(7):623-629.
16. Vita R, et al. (2010) The immune epitope database 2.0. Nucleic Acids Res 38(Database issue):D854-D862.
17. Kyte J, Doolittle RF (1982) A simple method for displaying the hydropathic character of a protein. J Mol Biol 157(1):105-132.
18. Grantham R (1974) Amino acid difference formula to help explain protein evolution. Science 185(4154):862-864.
19. Zimmerman JM, Eliezer N, Simha R (1968) The characterization of amino acid sequences in proteins by statistical methods. J Theor Biol 21(2):170-201.
20. Rudolph MG, Stanfield RL, Wilson IA (2006) How TCRs bind MHCs, peptides, and coreceptors. Annu Rev Immunol 24:419-466.
21. Bishop CM (2006) Pattern Recognition and Machine Learning (Springer, New York).
22. Assarsson E, et al. (2008) Immunomic analysis of the repertoire of T-cell specificities for influenza A virus in humans. J Virol 82(24):12241-12251.
23. Weiskopf D, et al. (2011) Insights into HLA-restricted T cell responses in a novel mouse model of dengue virus infection point toward new implications for vaccine design. J Immunol 187(8):4268-4279.
24. Oukka M, et al. (1996) Protection against lethal viral infection by vaccination with nonimmunodominant peptides. J Immunol 157(7):3039-3045.
25. van der Most RG, et al. (1998) Identification of Db-and Kb-restricted subdominant cytotoxic T-cell responses in lymphocytic choriomeningitis virus-infected mice. Virology 240(1):158-167.
26. Pradeu T, Carosella ED (2006) On the definition of a criterion of immunogenicity. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 103(47):17858-17861.
27. Calis JJ, Sanchez-Perez GF, Keşmir C (2010) MHC class I molecules exploit the low G+C content of pathogen genomes for enhanced presentation. Eur J Immunol 40(10): 2699-2709.
28. Khrustalev VV, Barkovsky EV (2011) Percent of highly immunogenic amino acid residues forming B-cell epitopes is higher in homologous proteins encoded by GC-rich genes. J Theor Biol 282(1):71-79.
29. Huang L, Kuhls MC, Eisenlohr LC (2011) Hydrophobicity as a driver of MHC class I antigen processing. EMBO J 30(8):1634-1644.
30. Kim Y, Yewdell JW, Sette A, Peters B (2013) Positional bias of MHC class I restricted T-cell epitopes in viral antigens is likely due to a bias in conservation. PLOS Comput Biol 9(1):e1002884.
31. Seong SY, Matzinger P (2004) Hydrophobicity: An ancient damage-associated molecular pattern that initiates innate immune responses. Nat Rev Immunol 4(6): 469-478.
32. Burroughs NJ, de Boer RJ, Keşmir C (2004) Discriminating self from nonself with short peptides from large proteomes. Immunogenetics 56(5):311-320.
33. Birnbaum ME, et al. (2014) Deconstructing the peptide-MHC specificity of T cell recognition. Cell 157(5):1073-1087.
34. Newell EW, Davis MM (2014) Beyond model antigens: High-dimensional methods for the analysis of antigen-specific T cells. Nat Biotechnol 32(2):149-157.
35. Snyder A, et al. (2014) Genetic basis for clinical response to CTLA-4 blockade in melanoma. N Engl J Med 371(23):2189-2199.
36. Yadav M, et al. (2014) Predicting immunogenic tumour mutations by combining mass spectrometry and exome sequencing. Nature 515(7528):572-576.
37. Riemer AB, et al. (2010) A conserved E7-derived cytotoxic T lymphocyte epitope expressed on human papillomavirus 16-transformed HLA-A2+ epithelial cancers. J Biol Chem 285(38):29608-29622.
38. Tan CT, Croft NP, Dudek NL, Williamson NA, Purcell AW (2011) Direct quantitation of MHC-bound peptide epitopes by selected reaction monitoring. Proteomics 11(11): 2336-2340.
39. Calis JJ, et al. (2013) Properties of MHC class I presented peptides that enhance immunogenicity. PLOS Comput Biol 9(10):e1003266.
40. Harndahl M, et al. (2012) Peptide-MHC class I stability is a better predictor than peptide affinity of CTL immunogenicity. Eur J Immunol 42(6):1405-1416.
41. Gasteiger E, et al. (2005) Protein identification and analysis tools on the ExPASy server. The Proteomics Protocols Handbook, ed Walker JM (Humana, Totowa, NJ), 1st Ed, pp 571-607.
42. R Development Core Team (2008) R: A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing (R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria).
43. Bachy V, et al. (2013) Langerin negative dendritic cells promote potent CD8+ T-cell priming by skin delivery of live adenovirus vaccine microneedle arrays. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 110(8):3041-3046.