ReviewCellular and molecular life sciences : CMLS2014
T cell receptor bias for MHC: co-evolution or co-receptors?
Review in Cellular and molecular life sciences : CMLS, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 29 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
29 citing papers in PubMed, 40 citations in OpenAlex.
- HLA alleles shape distinct biases in the usage preferences of TCR VFrontiers in immunology · 2026Article
- The Evolving T Cell Receptor Recognition Code: The Rules Are More Like Guidelines.Immunological reviews · 2025Review
- Injectable Genetic Engineering Hydrogel for Promoting Spatial Tolerance of Transplanted Kidney in Situ.Advanced science (Weinheim, Baden-Wurttemberg, Germany) · 2024Article
- Genomic Insights into Pig Domestication and Adaptation: An Integrated Approach Using Genome-Wide Selection Analysis and Multiple Public Datasets.Animals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2024Article
- A class-mismatched TCR bypasses MHC restriction via an unorthodox but fully functional binding geometry.Nature communications · 2022Article
- Benchmarking AlphaFold for protein complex modeling reveals accuracy determinants.Protein science : a publication of the Protein Society · 2022Article
- Review
- Chimeric Antigen Receptors Expand the Repertoire of Antigenic Macromolecules for Cellular Immunity.Cells · 2021Review
- Effect of P2X purinergic receptors in tumor progression and as a potential target for anti-tumor therapy.Purinergic signalling · 2021Review
- TCR Recognition of Peptide-MHC-I: Rule Makers and Breakers.International journal of molecular sciences · 2020Review
- An Engineered T Cell Receptor Variant Realizes the Limits of Functional Binding Modes.Biochemistry · 2020Article
- MHC Restriction: Where Are We Now?Viral immunology · 2020Article
- Geometrical characterization of T cell receptor binding modes reveals class-specific binding to maximize access to antigen.Proteins · 2020Article
- The intersection of affinity and specificity in the development and optimization of T cell receptor based therapeutics.Seminars in cell & developmental biology · 2018Review
- Understanding the drivers of MHC restriction of T cell receptors.Nature reviews. Immunology · 2018Review
- Conserved Vδ1 Binding Geometry in a Setting of Locus-Disparate pHLA Recognition by δ/αβ T Cell Receptors (TCRs): Insight into Recognition of HIV Peptides by TCRs.Journal of virology · 2017Article
- How an alloreactive T-cell receptor achieves peptide and MHC specificity.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2017Article
- MHC Bias by T Cell Receptors: Genetic Evidence for MHC and TCR Coevolution.Trends in immunology · 2017Article
- αβ T cell receptor germline CDR regions moderate contact with MHC ligands and regulate peptide cross-reactivity.Scientific reports · 2016Article
- Class II major histocompatibility complex mutant mice to study the germ-line bias of T-cell antigen receptors.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2016Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
In contrast to antibodies, which recognize antigens in native form, αβ T cell receptors (TCRs) only recognize antigens as peptide fragments bound to MHC molecules, a feature known as MHC restriction. The mechanism by which MHC restriction is imposed on the TCR repertoire is an unsolved problem that has generated considerable debate. Two principal models have been advanced to explain TCR bias for MHC. According to the germline model, MHC restriction is intrinsic to TCR structure because TCR and MHC molecules have co-evolved to conserve germline-encoded TCR sequences with the ability to bind MHC, while eliminating TCR sequences lacking MHC reactivity. According to the selection model, MHC restriction is not intrinsic to TCR structure, but is imposed by the CD4 and CD8 co-receptors that promote signaling by delivering the Src tyrosine kinase Lck to TCR-MHC complexes through co-receptor binding to MHC during positive selection. Here, we review the evidence for and against each model and conclude that both contribute to determining TCR specificity, although their relative contributions remain to be defined. Thus, TCR bias for MHC reflects not only germline-encoded TCR-MHC interactions but also the requirement to form a ternary complex with the CD4 or CD8 co-receptor that is geometrically competent to deliver a maturation signal to double-positive thymocytes during T cell selection.
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.