The standard model of T-cell receptor function: a critical reassessment

Signaling interactions predicted by the Tritope model of the TCR

As the data accumulates, it becomes obvious that the Standard Model of TCR structure-function relationships is in jeopardy. The proposed Tritope model has become more meaningful and, in any case, is richer in prediction and explanation. This is illustrated here by using the signaling interactions of the TCR as examples. An unsuspected signaling pathway for positive selection, and for alloreactivity, is predicted. Further, crucial data needed to elucidate the structural elements that distinguish signaling for restrictive- versus allo-reactivity are identified.

Core principles characterizing immune function

The immune system is an anticipatory mechanism designed by evolution to protect the individual against noxious agents and harmful cellular debris. In order to recognize substances that it has never encountered, the immune system somatically generates an appropriately sized random (with respect to self and nonself [NS]) recognitive repertoire that is coupled to a biodestructive and ridding output. Consequently, a Self-NS discrimination is required in order to avoid autoimmunity. This essay is an attempt to highlight the core principles upon which this anticipatory mechanism depends in order to function.

Contemplating Bretscher's View that the Tritope Model is 'Implausible'

There is, at present, only two models of the TCR structure-function relationship. These are referred to here as the Standard (Centric) model and the Tritope model. While I have argued that the Standard model is untenable and proposed the Tritope to replace it, Bretscher has argued that the Tritope model is 'implausible' and throws his support for the Standard model. This essay analyses the implausibility argument concluding that it is unfounded.

Thoughts on Positive Selection in Thymus

Any analysis of the mechanism of signalling during positive selection in the thymus is dependent on one's model of the TCR-ligand interaction. To date, thinking about mechanism has been dominated by what might be termed the Standard (or Centric) model, which is based on analogy between the BCR and the TCR. As the present analysis is an independent rationalized view of the TCR-ligand interactions, it permits a more balanced view of positive selection. The goal here was to explore this alternative to the Standard model.

Challenging the Tritope Model of T cell receptor structure-function relationships with classical data on 'super' and 'allo-MHC' antigens

The response of the immune system to allo-MHC-encoded antigens and Mls 'superantigens' has been experimentally analysed in detail, but the data have not been coupled to a theoretical framework. It should therefore be instructive to see how well the newly proposed Tritope Model of TCR structure-function relationships deals with the signalling interactions between the TCR and the above antigens. We will pay heed to William Bateson's admonition, 'treasure the exceptions', by showing how a meaningful theory interrogates the data with the same validity that the data interrogate the theory. The concordances, as well as the contradictions, with the Tritope Model are a test of its heuristic value.

Ten experiments that would make a difference in understanding immune mechanisms

Jacques Monod used to say, "Never trust an experiment that is not supported by a good theory." Theory or conceptualization permits us to put order or structure into a vast amount of data in a way that increases understanding. Validly competing theories are most useful when they make testably disprovable predictions. Illustrating the theory-experiment interaction is the goal of this exercise. Stated bleakly, the answers derived from the theory-based experiments described here would impact dramatically on how we understand immune behavior.

On the logic of restrictive recognition of peptide by the T-cell antigen receptor

This essay provides an analysis of the inadequacy of the current view of restrictive recognition of peptide by the T-cell antigen receptor. A competing model is developed, and the experimental evidence for the prevailing model is reinterpreted in the new framework. The goal is to contrast the two models with respect to their consistency, coverage of the data, explanatory power, and predictability.

On the opposing views of the self-nonself discrimination by the immune system

Today's generally accepted view of the self-nonself discrimination was voiced by Miller(1) in 2004 in a thought-provoking essay. In spite of its popularity, this position has its limitations, which are analyzed here with a view toward establishing an interactive discussion that hopefully will culminate in agreed upon decisive experiments. The inadequacies of Miller's view of the self-nonself discrimination and their resolution under the associative recognition of antigen model are analyzed.

A hypothesis accounting for the paradoxical expression of the D gene segment in the BCR and the TCR

The D gene segment expressed in both the TCR and the BCR has a challenging behavior that begs interpretation. It is incorporated in three reading frames in the rearranged transcription unit but is expressed in antigen-selected cells in a preferred frame. Why was it so important to waste 2/3 of newborn cells? The hypothesis is presented that the D region is framework playing a role in both the TCR and the BCR by determining whether a signal is transmitted to the cell upon interaction with a cognate ligand. This assumption operates in determining haplotype exclusion for the BCR and in regulating the signaling orientation for the TCR. Relevant data as well as a definitive experiment challenging the validity of this hypothesis, are discussed.

What does the T-cell receptor recognize when it docks on an MHC-encoded restricting element?

The postulate is analyzed that single V-gene segments encode recognition of the allele-specific determinants (a) required for the restrictive response of the alphabeta TCR to peptide. The consequence of this is that the positively selected V-domain, Valpha or Vbeta, engages an allele-specific determinant (a) on one subunit or domain of the MHC-encoded restricting element. The entrained V-domain docks on an invariant determinant (i) on the complementing subunit or domain. Consequently, each functional V-domain expresses an anti-a site and an anti-i site, and all subunits or domains of MHC-encoded restricting elements express an a- and i-determinant. The evidence, both biological and structural, discussed here strongly supports this postulate which has far reaching consequences.

The Tritope Model for restrictive recognition of antigen by T-cells II. Implications for ontogeny, evolution and physiology

Based on the Tritope Model of the TCR [Cohn, M., 2005c. The Tritope Model for restrictive recognition of antigen by T-cells. I. What assumptions about structure are needed to explain function? Mol. Immunol. 42, 1419-1443], a set of functional and evolutionary problems surrounding restrictive recognition of antigen are discussed. These include the origin of allele-specific recognition, the selection pressures for polygeneism and polymorphism, the TCR signaling interactions, the centrality of effector T-helper (eTh)-dependence for activation, the role of haplotype exclusion, "nonclassical" MHC-elements, alloreactivity versus xenoreactivity, etc. Further, a set of observations believed to support the Standard Model are reinterpreted.

An in depth analysis of the concept of "polyspecificity" assumed to characterize TCR/BCR recognition

A workshop group developed the concept of a "polyspecific" TCR/BCR in the framework of today's consensus model. They argue that the individual TCR/BCR combining site is composed of a packet of specificities randomly plucked from the repertoire, hence it is "polyspecific." This essay analyzes the conclusions of the workshop and suggests an alternative. "Polyspecificity" must be dissected into its two component parts, specificity and degeneracy. The TCR and the BCR must be treated differently because the TCR recognizes allele-specifically the MHC-encoded restricting element (R) that serves as the platform presenting peptide (P). Only the anti-P paratope of the TCR behaves analogously to the BCR paratope. The two paratopes are selected to recognize a shape-determinant referred to as an epitope or ligand. The paratope is functionally unispecific in recognition, not polyspecific, with respect to shape; it is degenerate in recognition with respect to chemistry. The recognized shape-determinant can be the product of many chemically different substances, peptide, carbohydrate, lipid, steroid, nucleic acid, etc. Such a degenerate set is functionally treated by the paratope as one shape/epitope/ligand and, in no sense, can a paratope recognizing such a degenerate set be described as "polyspecific." Degeneracy and specificity are concepts that must be distinguished. The two positions are analyzed in this essay, the experiments used to support the view that the paratope of the TCR/BCR is polyspecific, are reinterpreted, and an alternative framework with its accompanying nomenclature, is presented.

On a key postulate of T-cell receptor restrictive function: the V-gene loci act as a single pool encoding recognition of the polymorphic alleles of the species major histocompatibility complex

The proposition that single Valpha or Vbeta gene segments specify the recognition of the allele-specific determinants expressed on the major histocompatibility complex-encoded restricting elements of the species has as its consequence a totally different picture of the functioning of the T-cell receptor. This commentary justifies this assumption and outlines some of its most important consequences.

What are the commonalities governing the behavior of humoral immune recognitive repertoires?

The humoral repertoire of immune systems is large, random and somatically selected. It is derived from a germline selected repertoire by a variety of diversification mechanisms, complementation of subunits, mutation and gene conversion. However derived, the end-product must be able to recognize and rid a vast variety of pathogens. This is accomplished by viewing antigens as combinatorials of epitopes, an astuce that permits a small repertoire to respond sufficiently rapidly to a vast antigenic universe. A somatically generated repertoire, however, requires a solution to two problems. First, a somatic mechanism for a self-nonself discrimination has to be put in place. Second, the repertoire has to be coupled to the effector mechanisms in a coherent fashion. The rules governing these two mechanisms are species-independent and delineate the parameters of all immune repertoires, whatever the somatic mechanism used to generate them.

A commentary on the Zinkernagel-Hengartner 'Credo 2004'

In 'Credo 2004', Zinkernagel and Hengartner give us a food-for-thought analysis of immune responsiveness based on a 'pragmatic and empiric point of view.' The Credo 2004 postulates derived by inductive extrapolation from observation to generalization do not satisfactorily account for immune behaviour because they lack a conceptualization as illustrated here. Nevertheless, Credo 2004 is certainly valuable in a limited framework because it is based on the most likely of assumptions namely that the immune system was evolutionarily selected to protect against infectious agents, and therefore the study of pathogens will most accurately reveal how the immune system responds normally to protect. After reformulating them, the postulates of Credo 2004 are analysed with respect to their generality.

On 'reactivity' versus 'tolerance'

In Burnet's review on 'The impact of ideas on immunology' he considers himself an observer of nature using biochemical and molecular analysis for more detailed understanding, a description that applies also to me. I use three examples--repertoire selection of T cells, rules of immune reactivity versus non-reactivity and immunological memory--to illustrate the difficulties we all have in probing nature's immunological secrets and in critically testing immunologists' ideas. At one end of the spectrum of biological research one may argue everything is possible and therefore all results are correct, if correctly measured. But perhaps it is more important to always ask again and again what is frequent and enhances survival versus what is rare and an exception. At the same time one must keep in mind that special situations and special tricks may well be applied for medical benefits, although they may have little impact on physiology and species survival. I will attempt to use disease in virus-infected mice to obtain some answers to what I consider to be important immunological questions with the hope of improving the ratio of answers that are right for the right experimental reasons versus those that are right for the wrong reasons. Some of these experiments falsify hypotheses, previous experiments and interpretations and therefore are particularly important in correcting misleading concepts. They should help to find out which half of immunological ideas and truths in immunological text books written today are likely to be wrong. Ideas are important in immunology, but are often rather demagogically handled and therefore may cost us very dearly indeed. Evaluating immunity to infections and tumours in vivo should help prevent us from getting lost in immunology.

An alternative to current thinking about positive selection, negative selection and activation of T cells

Given that recognition by the T-cell receptor (TCR) of allele-specific determinants on major histocompatibility complex (MHC)-encoded restricting elements (Rs) is germline encoded, whereas recognition of peptide (P) is somatically encoded, two combining site repertoires, anti-R and anti-P, are implied. As a consequence, the three pathways of T cells, positive selection, negative selection and activation, must be signalled by qualitatively distinct interactions engaging the TCR. These are spelled out as they provide an alternative to the current thinking that these pathways depend on affinity-based quantitatively distinguishable interactions.

Does complexity belie a simple decision--on the Efroni and Cohen critique of the minimal model for a self-nonself discrimination

The immune system somatically generates a large and random paratopic repertoire that must be sorted into those specificities (anti-self) which, if expressed, would debilitate the host and those specificities (anti-nonself) which, if not expressed, would leave the host unprotected from infection. The critique of Efroni and Cohen that minimal models are misleading and without heuristic value is evaluated by illustrative examples.

Uncertainties - discrepancies in immunology

The many immunological observations and results from in-vitro or in-vivo experiments vary, and their interpretations differ enormously. A major problem is that within a normal distribution of biological phenomena, which are measurable with many methods, virtually anything is possible. Within a coevolutionary context, the definition of biologically relevant thresholds is an important key to improve our understanding of weaknesses and strengths of the immune system. This review is a personal view, comparing textbook rules and experiments using model antigens with observations on immunity against infections or tumors to critically evaluate our perception and understanding of specificity, affinity maturation, antigen presentation, selection of the class of the immune response, immunological memory and protective immunity, positive selection of T cells and self/nonself discrimination.

The immune system: a weapon of mass destruction invented by evolution to even the odds during the war of the DNAs

Living systems operate under interactive selective pressures. Populations have the ability to anticipate the future by generating a repertoire of elements that cope with new selective pressures. If the repertoire of such elements were transcendental, natural selection could not operate because any one of them would be too rare. This is the problem that vertebrates faced in order to deal with a vast number of pathogens. The solution was to invent an immune system that underwent somatic evolution. This required a random repertoire that was generated somatically and divided the antigenic universe into combinatorials of determinants. As a result, it became virtually impossible for pathogens to escape recognition but the functioning of such a repertoire required two new regulatory mechanisms: 1) a somatic discriminator between Not-To-Be-Ridded ('Self') and To-Be-Ridded ('Non-self') antigens, and 2) a way to optimize the magnitude and choice of the class of the effector response. The principles governing this dual regulation are analyzed in the light of natural selection.

Antiviral cytotoxic T cells cross-reactively recognize disparate peptide determinants from related viruses but ignore more similar self- and foreign determinants

We have investigated the reactivities of cytotoxic T (Tc) cells against the two immunodominant, H-2K(k)-restricted determinants from the FLAVIVIRUS: Murray Valley encephalitis virus (MVE), MVE(1785) (REHSGNEI) and MVE(1971) (DEGEGRVI). The respective Tc cell populations cross-reactively lysed target cells pulsed with determinants from the MVE(1785)- and MVE(1971)-corresponding positions of six other flaviviruses, despite low sequence homology in some cases. Notably, anti-MVE(1785) Tc cells recognized a determinant (TDGEERVI) that shares with the determinant used for stimulation only the carboxyl-terminal amino acid residue, one of two H-2K(k) anchor residues. These reactivity patterns were also observed in peptide-dependent IFN-gamma production and the requirements for in vitro restimulation of memory Tc cells. However, the broad cross-reactivity appeared to be limited to flavivirus-derived determinants, as none of a range of determinants from endogenous mouse-derived sequences, similar to the MVE-determinants, were recognized. Neither were cells infected with a number of unrelated viruses recognized. These results raise the paradox that virus-immune Tc cell responses, which are mostly directed against only a few "immunodominant" viral determinants, are remarkably peptide cross-reactive.

The specificity of immunological reactions

Specificity is an imprecise but widely used concept in immunology. Usually specificity is described in practical terms, such as the ability of one antibody to bind one and not another member of a family of chemically related substances. Karl Landsteiner's pioneering work "The Specificity of Serological Reactions" set the standard in experimental immunology over 50 years ago. Today, a more general yet precise concept of specificity is needed to describe the behavior of all antigen-specific recognitive components of the immune system. The necessary degree of specificity for antigen recognition in the immune response is determined by evolutionary selection pressures that result in the ridding of pathogens. Potent bio-destructive effector mechanisms are under the direction of specificity-determining elements (e.g. antibodies), and these must accurately distinguish Self (S) components (not to be destroyed) from Nonself (NS) components (to be destroyed). Binding reactions between antigen and antibody are necessary, though not sufficient, for the execution of the protective bio-destructive effector reactions, which, for example, require more than one antibody molecule to be bound before that antigen can be ridded. While the total number of different specificities will determine the precision with which S and NS are distinguished, a concept of relative specificity can be formulated in terms of a Specificity Index (SI), or the ratio of anti-S to anti-NS in the repertoire. A further question concerns whether specificity applies per receptor, or per paratope, when the number of paratopes per receptor is greater than one. The analyses and concepts developed here are based on immunoglobulin structure and function and extrapolated to include the less well studied T cell receptor system.