Article

Modeling T Cell Antigen Discrimination Based on Feedback Control of Digital ERK Responses

Lymphocyte Biology Section, Laboratory of Immunology, National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Disease, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland, United States of America.
PLoS Biology (Impact Factor: 11.77). 12/2005; 3(11):e356. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pbio.0030356
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT T-lymphocyte activation displays a remarkable combination of speed, sensitivity, and discrimination in response to peptide-major histocompatibility complex (pMHC) ligand engagement of clonally distributed antigen receptors (T cell receptors or TCRs). Even a few foreign pMHCs on the surface of an antigen-presenting cell trigger effective signaling within seconds, whereas 1 x 10(5)-1 x 10(6) self-pMHC ligands that may differ from the foreign stimulus by only a single amino acid fail to elicit this response. No existing model accounts for this nearly absolute distinction between closely related TCR ligands while also preserving the other canonical features of T-cell responses. Here we document the unexpected highly amplified and digital nature of extracellular signal-regulated kinase (ERK) activation in T cells. Based on this observation and evidence that competing positive- and negative-feedback loops contribute to TCR ligand discrimination, we constructed a new mathematical model of proximal TCR-dependent signaling. The model made clear that competition between a digital positive feedback based on ERK activity and an analog negative feedback involving SH2 domain-containing tyrosine phosphatase (SHP-1) was critical for defining a sharp ligand-discrimination threshold while preserving a rapid and sensitive response. Several nontrivial predictions of this model, including the notion that this threshold is highly sensitive to small changes in SHP-1 expression levels during cellular differentiation, were confirmed by experiment. These results combining computation and experiment reveal that ligand discrimination by T cells is controlled by the dynamics of competing feedback loops that regulate a high-gain digital amplifier, which is itself modulated during differentiation by alterations in the intracellular concentrations of key enzymes. The organization of the signaling network that we model here may be a prototypic solution to the problem of achieving ligand selectivity, low noise, and high sensitivity in biological responses.

Download full-text

Full-text

Available from: Grégoire Altan-Bonnet, Jan 06, 2014
0 Followers
 · 
96 Views
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: It has been known for some time that human autoimmune diseases can be triggered by viral infections. Several possible mechanisms of interactions between a virus and immune system have been analysed, with a prevailing opinion being that the onset of autoimmunity can in many cases be attributed to "molecular mimicry", where linear peptide epitopes, processed from viral proteins, mimic normal host self-proteins, thus leading to a cross-reaction of immune response against virus with host cells. In this paper we present a mathematical model for the dynamics of an immune response to a viral infection and autoimmunity, which takes into account T cells with different activation thresholds. We show how the infection can be cleared by the immune system, as well as how it can lead to a chronic infection or recurrent infection with relapses and remissions. Numerical simulations of the model are performed to illustrate various dynamical regimes, as well as to analyse the potential impact of treatment of autoimmune disease in the chronic and recurrent states. The results provide good qualitative agreement with available data on immune responses to viral infections and progression of autoimmune diseases.
    Journal of Theoretical Biology 05/2012; 308:45-55. DOI:10.1016/j.jtbi.2012.05.019 · 2.30 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The T cell receptor (TCR) is responsible for discriminating between self- and foreign-derived peptides, translating minute differences in amino-acid sequence into large differences in response. Because of the great variability in the TCR and its ligands, activation of T cells by foreign peptides is a quantitative process, dependent on a mix of upstream signals and downstream integration. Accordingly, quantitative data and computational models have shed light on many important aspects of this process: molecular noise in ligand recognition, spatial dynamics in T cell-APC (antigen presenting cell) interactions, graded versus all-or-none decision making by the TCR apparatus, mechanisms of peptide antagonism and synergism, and the tunability and robustness of activation thresholds. Though diverse in their formalism, these studies together paint a picture of how modeling has shaped and will continue to shape understanding of T cell immunobiology.
    Cold Spring Harbor perspectives in biology 06/2010; 2(6):a005538. DOI:10.1101/cshperspect.a005538 · 8.23 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The development of antigen-specific therapies for the selective tolerization of autoreactive T cells remains the Holy Grail for the treatment of T-cell-mediated autoimmune diseases such as multiple sclerosis (MS) and its animal model experimental autoimmune encephalomyelitis (EAE). This quest remains elusive, however, as the numerous antigen-specific strategies targeting myelin-specific T cells over the years have failed to result in clinical success. In this review, we revisit the antigen-based therapies used in the treatment of myelin-specific CD4+ T cells in the context of the functional avidity and the strength of signal of the encephalitogenic CD4+ T cell repertoire. In light of differences in activation thresholds, we propose that autoreactive T cells are not all equal, and therefore tolerance induction strategies must incorporate ligand strength in order to be successful in treating EAE and ultimately the human disease MS.
    Journal of Neuroimmune Pharmacology 11/2009; 5(2):176-88. DOI:10.1007/s11481-009-9181-3 · 3.17 Impact Factor