4.6 Article

The Binding of Antigenic Peptides to HLA-DR Is Influenced by Interactions between Pocket 6 and Pocket 9

Journal

JOURNAL OF IMMUNOLOGY
Volume 183, Issue 5, Pages 3249-3258

Publisher

AMER ASSOC IMMUNOLOGISTS
DOI: 10.4049/jimmunol.0802228

Keywords

-

Categories

Funding

  1. National Institutes of Health [HHSN266200400028C]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Peptide binding to class II MHC protein is commonly viewed as a combination of discrete anchor residue preferences for pockets 1,4,6/7, and 9. However, previous studies have suggested cooperative effects during the peptide binding process. Investigation of the DRB1*0901 binding motif demonstrated a clear interaction between peptide binding pockets 6 and 9. In agreement with prior studies, pockets 1 and 4 exhibited clear binding preferences. Previously uncharacterized pockets 6 and 7 accommodated a wide variety of residues. However, although it was previously reported that pocket 9 is completely permissive, several substitutions at this position were unable to bind. Structural modeling revealed a probable interaction between pockets 6 and 9 through beta 9Lys. Additional binding studies with doubly substituted peptides confirmed that the amino acid bound within pocket 6 profoundly influences the binding preferences for pocket 9 of DRB1*0901, causing complete permissiveness of pocket 9 when a small polar residue is anchored in pocket 6 but accepting relatively few residues when a basic residue is anchored in pocket 6. The beta 9Lys residue is unique to DR9 alleles. However, similar studies with doubly substituted peptides confirmed an analogous interaction effect for DRA1/B1*0301, a beta 9Glu allele. Accounting for this interaction resulted in improved epitope prediction. These findings provide a structural explanation for observations that an amino acid in one pocket can influence binding elsewhere in the MHC class II peptide binding groove. The Journal of Immunology, 2009, 183: 3249-3258.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available