Placental leucine aminopeptidase efficiently generates mature antigenic peptides in vitro but in patterns distinct from endoplasmic reticulum aminopeptidase 1.

Protein Chemistry Laboratory, Institute of Radioisotopes and Radiodiagnostic Products, National Centre for Scientific Research "Demokritos," Athens 15310, Greece.
The Journal of Immunology (Impact Factor: 5.36). 08/2010; 185(3):1584-92. DOI: 10.4049/jimmunol.0902502
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT All three members of the oxytocinase subfamily of M1 aminopeptidases, endoplasmic reticulum aminopeptidase 1 (ERAP1), ERAP2, and placental leucine aminopeptidase (PLAP), also known as insulin-regulated aminopeptidase, have been implicated in the generation of MHC class I-presented peptides. ERAP1 and 2 trim peptides in the endoplasmic reticulum for direct presentation, whereas PLAP has been recently implicated in cross-presentation. The best characterized member of the family, ERAP1, has unique enzymatic properties that fit well with its role in Ag processing. ERAP1 can trim a large variety of long peptide sequences and efficiently accumulate mature antigenic epitopes of 8-9 aa long. In this study, we evaluate the ability of PLAP to process antigenic peptide precursors in vitro and compare it with ERAP1. We find that, similar to ERAP1, PLAP can trim a variety of long peptide sequences efficiently and, in most cases, accumulates appreciable amounts of correct length mature antigenic epitope. Again, similar to ERAP1, PLAP continued trimming some of the epitopes tested and accumulated smaller products effectively destroying the epitope. However, the intermediate accumulation properties of ERAP1 and PLAP are distinct and epitope dependent, suggesting that these two enzymes may impose different selective pressures on epitope generation. Overall, although PLAP has the necessary enzymatic properties to participate in generating or destroying MHC class I-presented peptides, its trimming behavior is distinct from that of ERAP1, something that supports a separate role for these two enzymes in Ag processing.

  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The members of the M1 aminopeptidase family share conserved domains, yet show functional divergence within the family as a whole. In order to better understand this family, this study analyzed the mammalian members in depth at exon, gene, and protein levels. The twelve human members, eleven rat members, and eleven mouse members were first analyzed in multiple alignments to visualize both reported and unreported conserved domains. Phylogenetic trees were then generated for humans, rats, mice, and all mammals to determine how closely related the homologs were and to gain insight to the divergence in the family members. This produced three groups with similarity within the family. Next, a synteny study was completed to determine the present locations of the genes and changes that had occurred. It became apparent that gene death likely resulted in the lack of one member in mouse and rat. Finally, an in-depth analysis of the exon structure revealed that nine members of the human family and eight in mouse, are highly conserved within the exon structure. Taken together, these results indicate that the M1 aminopeptidase family is a divergent family with three subgroups and that genetic evidence mirrors categorization of the family by enzymatic function.
    Gene 09/2014; 552(1). DOI:10.1016/j.gene.2014.09.025 · 2.20 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The endoplasmic reticulum aminopeptidases (ERAP)1 and ERAP2 play a critical role in the production of final epitopes presented by MHC class I molecules. Formation of heterodimers by ERAP1 and ERAP2 has been proposed to facilitate trimming of epitope precursor peptides, but the effects of dimerization on ERAP function remain unknown. In this study, we produced stabilized ERAP1-ERAP2 heterodimers and found that they produced several mature epitopes more efficiently than a mix of the two enzymes unable to dimerize. Physical interaction with ERAP2 changes basic enzymatic parameters of ERAP1 and improves its substrate-binding affinity. Thus, by bringing the two enzymes in proximity and by producing allosteric effects on ERAP1, dimerization of ERAP1/2 creates complexes with superior peptide-trimming efficacy. Such complexes are likely to enhance Ag presentation by cells displaying coordinated expression of the two enzymes.
    The Journal of Immunology 06/2014; 193(2). DOI:10.4049/jimmunol.1302855 · 5.36 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Dendritic cells (DCs), macrophages (MPs), and monocytes are permissive to HIV. Whether they similarly process and present HIV epitopes to HIV-specific CD8 T cells is unknown despite the critical role of peptide processing and presentation for recognition and clearance of infected cells. Cytosolic peptidases degrade endogenous proteins originating from self or pathogens, exogenous Ags preprocessed in endolysosomes, thus shaping the peptidome available for endoplasmic reticulum translocation, trimming, and MHC-I presentation. In this study, we compared the capacity of DCs, MPs, and monocyte cytosolic extracts to produce epitope precursors and epitopes. We showed differences in the proteolytic activities and expression levels of cytosolic proteases between monocyte-derived DCs and MPs and upon maturation with LPS, R848, and CL097, with mature MPs having the highest activities. Using cytosol as a source of proteases to degrade epitope-containing HIV peptides, we showed by mass spectrometry that the degradation patterns of long peptides and the kinetics and amount of antigenic peptides produced differed among DCs, MPs, and monocytes. Additionally, variable intracellular stability of HIV peptides prior to loading onto MHC may accentuate the differences in epitope availability for presentation by MHC-I between these subsets. Differences in peptide degradation led to 2- to 25-fold differences in the CTL responses elicited by the degradation peptides generated in DCs, MPs, and monocytes. Differences in Ag-processing activities between these subsets might lead to variations in the timing and efficiency of recognition of HIV-infected cells by CTLs and contribute to the unequal capacity of HIV-specific CTLs to control viral load.
    The Journal of Immunology 09/2014; 193(9). DOI:10.4049/jimmunol.1400491 · 5.36 Impact Factor

Full-text (2 Sources)

Available from
Jun 2, 2014