ArticleBiochemistry2010
Combinations of affinity-enhancing mutations in a T cell receptor reveal highly nonadditive effects within and between complementarity determining regions and chains.
Article in Biochemistry, 2010. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
7 citing papers in PubMed, 10 citations in OpenAlex.
- T-cell receptor affinity in the age of cancer immunotherapy.Molecular carcinogenesis · 2020Review
- Specific increase in potency via structure-based design of a TCR.Journal of immunology (Baltimore, Md. : 1950) · 2014Article
- Computational design of the affinity and specificity of a therapeutic T cell receptor.PLoS computational biology · 2014Article
- Subtle changes in TCRα CDR1 profoundly increase the sensitivity of CD4 T cells.Molecular immunology · 2013Article
- Increasing affinity of interferon-γ receptor 1 to interferon-γ by computer-aided design.BioMed research international · 2013Article
- The Missing Heritability in T1D and Potential New Targets for Prevention.Journal of diabetes research · 2013Article
- Combining different design strategies for rational affinity maturation of the MICA-NKG2D interface.Protein science : a publication of the Protein Society · 2012Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Understanding the energetic and structural response to multiple mutations in a protein-protein interface is a key aspect of rational protein design. Here we investigate the cooperativity of combinations of point mutations of a T cell receptor (TCR) that binds in vivo to HLA-A2 MHC and a viral peptide. The mutations were obtained from two sources: a structure-based design study on the TCR alpha chain (nine mutations) and an in vitro selection study on the TCR beta chain (four mutations). In addition to combining the highest-affinity variants from each chain, we tested other combinations of mutations within and among the chains, for a total of 23 TCR mutants that we measured for binding kinetics to the peptide and major histocompatibility complex. A wide range of binding affinities was observed, from 2- to 1000-fold binding improvement versus that of the wild type, with significant nonadditive effects observed within and between TCR chains. This included an amino acid-dependent cooperative interaction between CDR1 and CDR3 residues that are separated by more than 9 A in the wild-type complex. When analyzing the kinetics of the mutations, we found that the association rates were primarily responsible for the cooperativity, while the dissociation rates were responsible for the anticooperativity (less-than-additive energetics). On the basis of structural modeling of anticooperative mutants, we determined that side chain clash between proximal mutants likely led to nonadditive binding energies. These results highlight the complex nature of TCR association and binding and will be informative in future design efforts that combine multiple mutant residues.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.