4.7 Article

Activation-threshold tuning in an affinity model for the T-cell repertoire

Journal

PROCEEDINGS OF THE ROYAL SOCIETY B-BIOLOGICAL SCIENCES
Volume 271, Issue 1539, Pages 609-616

Publisher

ROYAL SOC
DOI: 10.1098/rspb.2003.2653

Keywords

activation-threshold tuning; tolerance induction; T-cell repertoire; mathematical models; computer simulation models

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Naive T cells respond to peptides from foreign proteins and remain tolerant to self peptides from endogenous proteins. It has been suggested that self tolerance comes about by a 'tuning' mechanism, i.e. by increasing the T-cell activation threshold upon interaction with self peptides. Here, we explore how such an adaptive mechanism of T-cell tolerance would influence the reactivity of the T-cell repertoire to foreign peptides. We develop a computer simulation model in which T cells are tolerized by increasing their activation-threshold dependent on the affinity with which they see self peptides presented in the thymus. Thus, different T cells acquire different activation thresholds (i.e. different cross-reactivities). In previous mathematical models, T-cell tolerance was deletional and based on a fixed cross-reactivity parameter, which was assumed to have evolved to an optimal value. Comparing these two different tolerance-induction mechanisms, we found that the tuning model performs somewhat better than an optimized deletion model in terms of the reactivity to foreign antigens. Thus, evolutionary optimization of clonal cross-reactivity is not required. A straightforward extension of the tuning model is to delete T-cell clones that obtain a too high activation threshold, and to replace these by new clones. The reactivity of the immune repertoires of such a replacement model is enchanced compared with the basic tuning model. These results demonstrate that activation-threshold tuning is a functional mechanism for self tolerance induction.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available