4.8 Article

Affinity purification mass spectrometry analysis of PD-1 uncovers SAP as a new checkpoint inhibitor

出版社

NATL ACAD SCIENCES
DOI: 10.1073/pnas.1710437115

关键词

PD-1; SAP; T cells; SHP2; XLP

资金

  1. NIH [1R01AI125640-01, R01CA49152]
  2. Rheumatology Research Foundation
  3. Hirschl Trust
  4. Colton Family Scholarship Program
  5. NIH/National Cancer Institute (NCI) Grant [P30CA016087]
  6. Laura and Isaac Perlmutter Cancer Center Support Grant from the NCI [P30CA016087]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Programmed cell death-1 (PD-1) is an essential inhibitory receptor in T cells. Antibodies targeting PD-1 elicit durable clinical responses in patients with multiple tumor indications. Nevertheless, a significant proportion of patients do not respond to anti-PD-1 treatment, and a better understanding of the signaling pathways downstream of PD-1 could provide biomarkers for those whose tumors respond and new therapeutic approaches for those whose tumors do not. We used affinity purification mass spectrometry to uncover multiple proteins associated with PD-1. Among these proteins, signaling lymphocytic activation molecule-associated protein (SAP) was functionally and mechanistically analyzed for its contribution to PD-1 inhibitory responses. Silencing of SAP augmented and overexpression blocked PD-1 function. T cells from patients with X-linked lymphoproliferative disease (XLP), who lack functional SAP, were hyperresponsive to PD-1 signaling, confirming its inhibitory role downstream of PD-1. Strikingly, signaling downstream of PD-1 in purified T cell subsets did not correlate with PD-1 surface expression but was inversely correlated with intracellular SAP levels. Mechanistically, SAP opposed PD-1 function by acting as a molecular shield of key tyrosine residues that are targets for the tyrosine phosphatase SHP2, which mediates PD-1 inhibitory properties. Our results identify SAP as an inhibitor of PD-1 function and SHP2 as a potential therapeutic target in patients with XLP.

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

4.8
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