The JI
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
 QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     
 


This Article
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow Request Permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Yang, W.
Right arrow Articles by Grey, H. M.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Yang, W.
Right arrow Articles by Grey, H. M.
The Journal of Immunology, 2003, 170: 4532-4538.
Copyright © 2003 by The American Association of Immunologists

Study of the Mechanism of TCR Antagonism Using Dual-TCR-Expressing T Cells1

Wen Yang and Howard M. Grey2

La Jolla Institute for Allergy and Immunology, San Diego, CA 92121

The mechanism of action of TCR antagonists is incompletely understood. T cells expressing two distinct TCRs have been used to test competition for TCR occupancy as a potential mechanism. Previous studies with CD4 T cells showed that an antagonist for one TCR inhibited the response to the other TCR (cross-antagonism), whereas studies with CD8 cells failed to demonstrate cross-antagonism. To determine whether CD4 and CD8 cells were intrinsically different or whether the differences were the result of the use of different effector assays, we studied both CD4 and CD8 dual-TCR-expressing T cells. In the CD4 system, consistent with previous reports, cross-antagonism of proliferation was observed. In the CD8 system, cross-antagonism was observed using proliferation as readout but not when target cell cytolysis was used. These results suggest that different mechanisms may be involved in the inhibition of proliferation and inhibition of cytotoxic effector function, the latter only involving competition for TCR occupancy. Inhibition of proliferation appears to be more complex and other mechanisms such as sequestration of signaling molecules or negative signaling may be involved. The fact that 10- to 20-fold more antagonist was needed to achieve cross-antagonism compared with inhibition of the cognate TCR is consistent with the hypothesis that competition for TCR occupancy is also a major, albeit not sole, mechanism of antagonism of the proliferative responses of CD4 and CD8 cells.




This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
J. Immunol.Home page
D. S. Jones, P. Reichardt, M. L. Ford, L. J. Edwards, and B. D. Evavold
TCR Antagonism by Peptide Requires High TCR Expression
J. Immunol., August 1, 2008; 181(3): 1760 - 1766.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Int ImmunolHome page
W Yang, E. Beaudoin, L Lu, R. Du Pasquier, M. Kuroda, R. Willemsen, I. Koralnik, and R. Junghans
Chimeric immune receptors (CIRs) specific to JC virus for immunotherapy in progressive multifocal leukoencephalopathy (PML)
Int. Immunol., September 1, 2007; 19(9): 1083 - 1093.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
JCBHome page
C. Sumen, M. L. Dustin, and M. M. Davis
T cell receptor antagonism interferes with MHC clustering and integrin patterning during immunological synapse formation
J. Cell Biol., August 16, 2004; 166(4): 579 - 590.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]




HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
This Website Copyright © 2003 by The American Association of Immunologists, Inc. All rights reserved.
All Contents Copyright © 2003 by The American Association of Immunologists, Inc. All rights reserved.