4.7 Article

How C-terminal additions to insulin B-chain fragments create superagonists for T cells in mouse and human type 1 diabetes

期刊

SCIENCE IMMUNOLOGY
卷 4, 期 34, 页码 -

出版社

AMER ASSOC ADVANCEMENT SCIENCE
DOI: 10.1126/sciimmunol.aav7517

关键词

-

资金

  1. NIH [5 T32-AI-074491, ES-025797, ES-025885, AI-018785, DK-032083, GM103403]
  2. JDRF [1-2008-588, P01AI-118688, 1-PNF-2015-126-A-R]
  3. University of Colorado CCTSI [KL2 TR001080]
  4. Boettcher Foundation Investigator award
  5. National Jewish Health
  6. School of Medicine of University of Colorado at Denver
  7. Claire Friedlander Family Foundation
  8. NIH-ORIP HEI [S10 RR029205]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

In type 1 diabetes (T1D), proinsulin is a major autoantigen and the insulin B:9-23 peptide contains epitopes for CD4(+) T cells in both mice and humans. This peptide requires carboxyl-terminal mutations for uniform binding in the proper position within the mouse IA(g7) or human DQ8 major histocompatibility complex (MHC) class II (MHCII) peptide grooves and for strong CD4(+) T cell stimulation. Here, we present crystal structures showing how these mutations control CD4(+) T cell receptor (TCR) binding to these MHCII-peptide complexes. Our data reveal stricking similarities between mouse and human CD4(+) TCRs in their interactions with these ligands. We also show how fusions between fragments of B:9-23 and of proinsulin C-peptide create chimeric peptides with activities as strong or stronger than the mutated insulin peptides. We propose transpeptidation in the lysosome as a mechanism that could accomplish these fusions in vivo, similar to the creation of fused peptide epitopes for MHCI presentation shown to occur by transpeptidation in the proteasome. Were this mechanism limited to the pancreas and absent in the thymus, it could provide an explanation for how diabetogenic T cells escape negative selection during development but find their modified target antigens in the pancreas to cause T1D.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据