|
|
||||||||
Department of Microbiology and Immunology, Jefferson Medical College and Kimmel Cancer Institute, Thomas Jefferson University, Philadelphia, PA 19107
| Abstract |
|---|
|
|
|---|
| Introduction |
|---|
|
|
|---|
Within the past 15 years, several key findings have led to a dramatic revision of the model. First, it was deduced that fragments of Ag rather than full-length protein are recognized by TCD8+ (11, 12). Soon thereafter it was demonstrated that delivery to the cytosol was a critical step in the presentation of exogenously provided native Ags (13, 14). Subsequently, crucial roles in most cases of peptide presentation were demonstrated for TAP, a heterodimeric member of the ATP transporter family that efficiently transfers short peptides from the cytosol to the lumen of the endoplasmic reticulum (ER) (15) and the proteasome, a macromolecular multicatalytic protease located in the cytosol and nucleus (16).
These advances firmly established a need for Ag processing in the cytosol (for reviews, see Refs. 16, 17, 18) and, whereas the original model predicts that exocytic rather than cytosolic proteins are the primary stimulators of TCD8+ responses, the revised model predicts the opposite. Compatible with the latter prediction are the observations that relocation of HA and HIV envelope protein to the cytosol by genetic ablation of their signal sequences can significantly enhance presentation (19, 20). The reverse approach, redirection of influenza NP to the ER, was observed to reduce the presentation of an H-2Kd-restricted epitope (21). The true magnitude of these differences is difficult to gauge given the semiquantitative nature of the standard cytolysis assays that were used and the relatively low levels of epitope that are needed at the cell surface for maximal TCD8+ stimulation in such assays. In the cases of the glycoproteins, it is also difficult to determine whether cytosolic delivery enhances presentation due to relocation or due to a significantly decreased half-life, because degradation rate has been reported by many (19, 20, 22, 23, 24), though not all (25), groups to cause enhanced MHC class I-restricted presentation.
A requirement for cytosolic processing was established at a time when it was generally held that protein trafficking across the ER membrane is unidirectional (cytosol to ER) and that a separate, ER-resident degradation system exists to eliminate exocytic proteins that fail quality control (26). In this light, several models were proposed to explain the processing of exocytic proteins, including 1) the misdirection of a minor fraction of nascent protein to the cytosol perhaps through translation on free ribosomes, 2) saturation of the translocation machinery (17, 27), and 3) failure of the ER targeting signal sequence to be synthesized (21, 28). In any of these models, presentation would be relatively inefficient, as only a small fraction of total Ag is accessed by the processing machinery. It is now clear from a number of cases that degradation of exocytic proteins involves retrograde transport through the translocon (termed "retrotranslocation" here and elsewhere (29)) and delivery to the proteasome (29, 30). In some cases it appears that the proteasome can play an active role in retrotranslocation (31, 32). This also appears to be the primary route for the generation of most glycoprotein-derived epitopes. Central to this conclusion has been the study of epitopes that contain N-linked glycosylation sequences and whose presentation can be monitored by T cell responses that are prevented by glycosylation. In almost all cases studied, T cell activation occurs when Ags containing these epitopes are targeted to the cytosol, but is significantly reduced or lost with targeting of the Ag to the ER, the site of glycosylation (21, 33, 34, 35).
Despite the elucidation of this pathway, it still seems reasonable to assume that presentation of exocytic Ags will be less efficient than presentation of their cytosolic counterparts due to the additional handling that is required. It might also be expected that, with the exception of the translocation step, processing of exocytic and cytosolic Ags is qualitatively similar. Considering the wide variety of models that have been proposed for class I-restricted Ag processing and the significance of the targeting issue for vaccine design, we felt it important to test these expectations under conditions that allow for a fair comparison of relative presentation levels. Thus, we have assessed the production of three influenza virus A/PR/8/34 NP-derived epitopes when NP is targeted to the cytosol or to the ER. Using a system for limiting, in controlled fashion, levels of Ag expression, we find that presentation of two proteasome inhibitor-sensitive epitopes (NP5057 and NP366374) is not compromised by ER targeting while that of a proteasome inhibitor-insensitive epitope (NP147155) is significantly reduced. Furthermore, addition of proteasome inhibitor enhances presentation of NP147155 when NP is targeted to the ER but has no effect when NP is targeted to the cytosol. Thus, ER localization is not necessarily a detriment to efficient presentation, and processing is qualitatively different for Ags targeted to the two compartments.
| Materials and Methods |
|---|
|
|
|---|
General chemical supplies were obtained from Sigma-Aldrich (St. Louis, MO). Molecular biology reagents were obtained from New England Biolabs (Beverly, MA). Isotopes were purchased from Amersham (Arlington Heights, IL) and lactacystin was purchased from the laboratory of Dr. E. J. Corey (Harvard University, Boston, MA). Carboxybenzyl-leucyl-leucyl-leucine vinyl sulfone (Z-L3VS) (36) was a generous gift of Dr. H. Ploegh (Harvard University). Monoclonal anti-NP Abs were provided by Dr. W. Gerhard (Wistar Institute, Philadelphia, PA). PCR primers were synthesized at the Kimmel Cancer Center Nucleic Acid Facility (Philadelphia, PA).
Cell lines
MC57G (H-2Db), L929 (H-2Kk), L-Kd (L929 transfected with H-2Kd), L-Db (L929 transfected with H-2Db), and 3T3 cells were maintained in DMEM with 5% FBS. T2 cells (37) transfected with H-2Kd (38) or H-2Kk (T2-Kd and T2- Kk cells) were maintained in RPMI 1640 with 10% FBS. The T2-Kk cells were provided by Dr. P. Cresswell (Yale University, New Haven, CT) and were produced by transfection according to methods described elsewhere (39).
Animals
Six- to 8-wk-old female inbred C3H (H-2k), BALB/c (H-2d), and C57BL/6 (H-2b) mice were obtained from Taconic Farms (Albany, NY) or The Jackson Laboratory (Bar Harbor, ME) and maintained in the Thomas Jefferson University Laboratory Animal Facilities (Philadelphia, PA).
Viruses
The recombinant vaccinia viruses (rvacs) encoding NP and
minigenes NP5057,
NP147155, and NP366374
have been previously described (28). Generation of the
NP13498 and ER-NP13498
genes was by one-step PCR essentially as described elsewhere
(40). Primers for NP13498 were GTC
GAC TCT TAC GAA CAG ATG GAG ACT and ATT AGC TTG GCG CCA GAT TC,
allowing substitution of a SalI/AatII fragment.
ER-NP13498 was prepared by attaching the
signal sequence from the influenza virus strain A/WSN/33 hemagglutinin
to the NP gene in front of Met13. Primers for
this one-step reaction were ACG CGT CGA CCA CCA TGA AGG CAA AGC TAC TGG
TCC TGT TAT ACG CAT TTG TCG CAG GCG ACC AGG CTA GCA TGG AGA CTG ATG GAG
AAC GCC AG and CCT CTG TTG ATT GGT GTT TCC, allowing substitution of a
SalI/ApaI fragment. The Q to N substitutions
inside the NP147155 epitopes of
NP13498 and
ER-NP13498 were conducted by one-step PCR using
the downstream primer GAA CAA GGG CCC TTG TCC TGT TAT AAG TTG and
upstream primer GGT AAG GAA GTA GAA TCA T, allowing the substitution of
SalI/ApaI fragment. The genes were cloned into
modified versions of the pSC11 plasmid, containing heteroduplexes
(hairpins (HP)) of different lengths (16, 18, and 20 bp) in the 5'
untranslated region of the recombinant gene (28, 41, 42).
Sequencing, using
-cyanoethyl phosphoramidities chemistry (Applied
Biosystems, Foster City, CA) and conducted by the Kimmel
Cancer Institute Nucleic Acid Facility, confirmed the integrity
of each construct. Recombination into vaccinia virus (vac) and
titration of vac (in duplicate) was conducted as described (28, 40).
CTL assay
Epitope-specific TCD8+ were derived from C57BL/6, C3H, or BALB/c mice, respectively, as described elsewhere (28, 40). Briefly, mice were immunized by i.p. injection of 107 PFU of a vac expressing the isolated NP366374 epitope in the case of C57BL/6, a vac expressing the isolated NP147155 epitope in the case of BALB/c, and a vac expressing the isolated NP5057 epitope in the case of C3H mice. After at least 2 wk, spleens from appropriate mice were harvested and one-third of cells were infected with A/PR/8/34 influenza virus for restimulation. Secondary cultures were incubated at 37°C/6% CO2 for 67 days before harvesting for effector population.
CTL assays were performed as previously described (28, 40, 42). L929, L-Kd, or MC57G cells were used as APCs for H-2Kk-, H-2Kd-, and H-2Db-restricted responses, respectively. APC were infected for 1 h at 37°C with vaccinia recombinants at 10 PFU/cell at a concentration of 107 cells/ml in balanced salt solution containing 0.1% BSA. For evaluation of TAP dependence, T2-Kd or T2- Kk cells were infected with 10 PFU/cell rvac and 10 PFU/cell of a control vac or TAP1/2-expressing rvac. After 1 h, 2 ml of RPMI 1640 plus 10% FBS were added and the cells were incubated for another 3 h with rotation. Cells were pelleted and resuspended with 50 µl/106 cells of RPMI 1640 with 10% FCS containing 100 µCi of Na51CrO4 (Amersham) and incubated for 1 h at 37°C. APC were then washed three times with PBS and resuspended in RPMI 1640 plus 10% FBS and combined with CTL populations in round-bottom plates at 104 cells/well. APCs and CTL were coincubated for 4 h at 37°C before 100 µl of supernatants were collected and counted in a gamma detector (Pharmacia Biotech, Uppsala, Sweden). The data are presented as percentage of specific 51Cr release, defined as 100 x ((experimental cpm - spontaneous cpm)/(total cpm - spontaneous cpm)). When needed, lactacystin was added to a final concentration of 50 µM during the first 5 h of the assay.
Metabolic labeling, immunoprecipitation, and Endo H treatment
Metabolic labeling and immunoprecipitation were performed essentially as described elsewhere (28), except that a mixture of two anti-NP mAbs was used (H16-L10-4R5 and H19-S24-4). [35S]Methionine/cysteine at 50100 µCi/106 cells was used in all cases. Endoglycosidase H (Endo H; Boehringer Mannheim, Mannheim, Germany) experiments involved a 20-min pulse at 4 h postinfection, and Endo H treatment following immunoprecipitation was performed as described elsewhere (43). Briefly, 20 µl of the reaction mixture (0.1 M sodium acetate (pH 6), 5 mM EDTA, 2 mM PMSF, 1 mU Endo H) were added to 10 µl of the protein in Laemmli sample buffer (44); the reaction mixture without Endo H was added to the control samples. The reaction was allowed to proceed for 12 h at 31°C. Proteins were separated by SDS-PAGE in 10% gels and visualized by autoradiography.
Subcellular fractionation
Subcellular fractionation was performed as described elsewhere (45). Briefly, cells were resuspended in homogenization buffer (0.25 mM sucrose, 10 mM triethanolamine, 10 mM acetic acid, 1 mM EDTA (pH 7.4)) and disrupted in a Dounce homogenizer (50 strokes, pestle type A). After removal of nuclei, the homogenate was first centrifuged at 10,000 x g for 30 min and the supernatant was recentrifuged at 100,000 x g for 60 min. The 10,000 x g pellet from subcellular fractionation was resuspended in reaction buffer (10 mM Tris-HCl (pH 8), 10 mM CaCl2) in the presence or absence of 0.2 mg/ml protease K. A total of 0.5% NP40 was added to a control sample. The samples were then incubated for 1 h at 4°C and the reaction was stopped by addition of PMSF to a final concentration of 2 mM. Immunoprecipitation, SDS-PAGE, and autoradiography were performed.
Immunofluorescence
A total of 5 x 104 3T3 cells were seeded onto coverslips in 24-well plates and incubated overnight. Cells were infected with 5 PFU/cell indicated vac and incubated for 4 h at 37°C/9% CO2. The monolayers were washed three times with ice-cold PBS and fixed-permeabilized in methanol/acetone (1/1) for 1 min. Between each of the remaining steps the coverslips were washed three times with PBS. Anti-NP Abs H16-L10-4R5 and H19-S24-4 were used as primary Abs and were incubated with the cells overnight at 4°C. Fluorescein-labeled horse anti-mouse Ig (IgG) (Vector Laboratories, Burlingame, CA) was used as secondary Abs with incubation for 30 min at 37°C. For negative control wells, the secondary (FITC-labeled) reagent alone was used. All images were viewed at the Kimmel Cancer Institute Confocal Facility.
Peptide elution
Peptide elution was performed as described elsewhere
(46). Briefly, 2 x 108 MC57G
cells were infected with the corresponding vacs at 10 PFU/cell for
5 h. The cell pellet was then sedimented at 1,000 x
g for 10 min. The cells were resuspended in 0.5%
trifluoroacetic acid in deionized water in the presence of 1 mM of PMSF
and 10 µM leupeptin and were disrupted in a Dounce homogenizer (50
strokes, pestle type B). The cell debris was sedimented by
centrifugation at 15,000 x g for 20 min, and the
resulting lysate was filtrated through Centriplus (Amicon, Beverly, MA)
units with >6,000-kDa exclusion. The low molecular filtrate was
separated using reversed phase HPLC using a 218TP column
(C18, 5-µM particle size; Vydac, Hesperia, CA).
Fractions (0.6 ml) were collected, dried and resuspended in 150 µl of
PBS. Fifty microliters of these fractions or their 2-fold serial
dilutions were added to wells of 96-well plates. MC57G cells, which had
been preincubated at 26°C for at least 24 h to maximize
expression of the peptide-receptive MHC class I molecules on their
surfaces, were added at a density of 5 x
103/50 µl to each well containing HPLC
fractions and incubated for 3 h at 26°C.
NP366374-specific
Db-restricted T cell hybridoma DBFZ.25
(47) (1 x 105/well) was added
then, and the plates were incubated for 24 h at 37°C. Activated
T-hybridoma cells were assayed for
-galactosidase (lacZ)
production as described (47). The retention time of the
NP366374 epitope was evaluated by comparison
with the model peptide ASNENMETM corresponding to the influenza virus
A/PR/8/34 NP366374 epitope.
| Results |
|---|
|
|
|---|
NP expressed either in isolation or during an influenza infection
exists in both the cytosol and nucleus, and the Ag processing
capabilities in these two compartments may differ significantly. For
example, the 11S Reg (also termed PA28) caps of nuclear proteasomes
contain
subunits while those of the cytosol contain primarily
and
, and 11S Reg composition has been shown to alter the cleavage
specificity of the proteasome (48). To eliminate this
complication, we abrogated trafficking of NP to the nucleus. This was
accomplished by removing the first 36 bases that encode an
unconventional nuclear localization signal (49, 50).
Confocal immunofluorescence studies of cells infected with a rvac
expressing this variant, termed NP13498,
demonstrate that the protein is located almost entirely in the cytosol,
in stark contrast to cells infected with vac expressing
wild-type NP (Fig. 1
A). To
direct NP13498 to the exocytic compartment, we
attached the leader sequence of influenza A/WSN/33 hemagglutinin to its
amino terminus, generating ER-NP13498. Again,
immunofluorescence microscopy confirmed the predicted location of this
form (Fig. 1
A). The constructs were then subjected to a
series of biochemical studies. The initiating codons of
NP13498 and ER-NP13498
are surrounded by different bases and the proteins might therefore be
synthesized at different rates (51), a situation that
would complicate interpretation of any observed differences in Ag
presentation. To address this possibility, we conducted brief (5 min)
metabolic labeling of cells infected with equal amounts of
NP13498- or
ER-NP13498-expressing rvac followed by
immunoprecipitation with a NP-specific mAb mixture, SDS-PAGE analysis,
and autoradiography. NP13498 contains one
predicted site of N-linked glycosylation near the N terminus
that can be used when NP13498 is delivered to
the ER (Fig. 1
B). To resolve
ER-NP13498 to a single band for direct
comparison with NP13498, the immunoprecipitate
was treated with Endo H before SDS-PAGE. Densitometry analysis of the
gel (data not shown) revealed the NP13498 and
Endo H-treated ER-NP13498 bands to be of
essentially identical intensity (Fig. 1
B), indicating very
similar rates of synthesis. Differences in stability between the two
forms of NP could also complicate interpretation as decreased stability
has been linked with enhanced Ag presentation by many (19, 20, 22, 23, 24, 52), though not all (25), groups. However,
the immunofluorescence and biochemical studies shown indicate the high
stability of both NP13498 and
ER-NP13498. Prolonged chase times reveal that a
portion of labeled ER-NP13498 remains
unglycosylated (data not shown). This might be due to a fraction of
ER-NP13498 being mistargeted to the cytosol,
though it seems much more likely to be due to failure of some
ER-NP13498 molecules to be modified at
Asn9 (with reference to
NP13498) due to its proximity to the N terminus
of the mature protein and, consequently, poor access to the
glycosylation machinery. First, analysis of cell extracts expressing
this protein following rvac infection indicate that virtually all
detectable ER-NP13498 is microsome associated
(Fig. 2
A). Furthermore, all
versions of ER-NP are resistant to proteinase K digestion unless the
microsome fraction is first treated with detergent (Fig. 2
B), indicating location of
ER-NP13498 in the lumen of the microsomal
fraction. This is in contrast to NP13498, which
partitions almost entirely in the cytosolic fraction. The small amount
of NP13498 that is microsome associated is
accessed by proteinase K without prior detergent treatment (Fig. 2
B), indicating location at the cytosolic face of the
microsomal membrane. Second, efficient delivery of full-length NP to
the ER following N-terminal attachment of a signal sequence has been
previously demonstrated, using glycosylation-sensitive
TCD8+ activation as a readout. In this case, the
H-2Kd-restricted NP147155
epitope was modified to allow for N-linked glycosylation at
position 149. Epitope-specific TCD8+ kills
targets expressing the mutated NP when it is expressed in the cytosol
but not when it is directed to the ER. The basis for this finding is
the N-linked glycosylation of the epitope in the ER,
followed by peptide:N-glycanase-mediated deglycosylation in
the cytosol (53). This process converts the glycosylated
asparagine to aspartic acid, a change that significantly reduces
recognition. Due to obvious differences between full-length NP and
NP13498, particularly in terms of
trafficking, and our use of a different signal sequence to
target NP13498 to the ER, we elected to confirm
ER targeting of ER-NP13498 at the level of
TCD8+ activation. Thus, the same Q149 to
N149 mutation was conducted for NP13498
(NP13498N) and
ER-NP13498
(ER-NP13498N). Metabolic
labeling experiments show the mutated version of
ER-NP13498
(ER-NP13498N) to be fully
glycosylated at either one or two sites (Fig. 3
A), confirming our
prediction that the unglycosylated
ER-NP13498 cohort is exocytic. When we assayed
for recognition of NP13498N
and ER-NP13498N by
NP147155-specific
TCD8+,
NP13498N was recognized but
ER-NP13498N was not (Fig. 3
B), as anticipated. Thus, essentially all of the
ER-NP13498 that is processed for presentation
is first delivered to the ER.
|
|
|
Relative production of three epitopes from NP13498 and ER-NP13498
Having established the biochemical properties of
NP13498 and ER-NP13498,
and having determined that presentation of epitopes from
ER-NP13498 requires retrotranslocation, we were
ready to carry out a careful comparison between the presentations of
epitopes from these two forms of NP. Such an analysis is frequently
impossible with standard assays, owing to the sensitivity of
TCD8+ to very low levels of Ag (28, 54, 55). We therefore placed the genes encoding
NP13498 and ER-NP13498
behind a series of sequences designed to create thermostable RNA
duplexes or HP 16, 18, and 20 bp in length. These structures limit, in
graded fashion, the biosynthesis of Ag and, consequently, the amount of
epitope presented (28, 41, 42). The various HP constructs
were recombined into the vac genome and the resulting viruses were
tested for their ability to sensitize target cells for killing by
TCD8+ specific for
NP147155, and two other well-defined epitopes
within NP (56, 57). In agreement with previous findings
(21), presentation of the
H-2Kd-restricted NP147155
epitope was diminished when the construct was delivered to the ER (Fig. 4
B). This is observed even
with no HP in place. In contrast, presentation of
NP5057 (H-2Kk-restricted,
Fig. 4
A) and NP366374
(H-2Db-restricted, Fig. 4
C) is not
compromised by delivery of NP to the ER, a finding clearly and
consistently observed under conditions of limited Ag expression (HP20).
Indeed, presentation of these epitopes often appears to be slightly
better from ER-NP13498 as in the assay shown in
Fig. 4
. To confirm this last, unexpected observation, we
assessed the relative amounts of NP366374
generated from the two forms of NP with a biochemical approach that has
become standard protocol (46). This involved acid elution
of peptides from whole cell extracts 5 h after infection, HPLC
separation of low-molecular mass peptides (<10 kDa), and
coincubation of fractions with target cells and the DBFZ.25
(47) T-hybridoma that produces
-galactosidase upon
activation by the
H-2Db/NP366374 complex.
Peptide levels from both forms of NP were very similar in all of the
active fractions (Fig. 5
), a conclusion
that we further strengthened by testing dilutions of the peak fractions
(Fig. 5
, inset).
|
|
In addition to showing that the presentation of some epitopes is
not compromised by delivery of Ag to the exocytic compartment, the data
in Fig. 4
also suggest that the processing of
NP13498 and ER-NP13498
is qualitatively different, because delivery to the cytosol favors
production of NP147155 but not
NP5057 or NP366374.
This possibility was reinforced by observations on the relative impact
that proteasome inhibitors have upon the generation of epitopes from
the two NP forms. We have observed that inhibitors of proteasome
cleavage decrease presentation of NP5057 and
NP366374 from wild-type NP (E. J. Wherry,
T. N. Golovina, and L. C. Eisenlohr, manuscript in preparation),
consistent with the original observation (58) and many
subsequent publications suggesting a critical role for the proteasome
in epitope generation. In contrast, presentation of
NP147155 is unaffected and in some cases
significantly enhanced by treatment of infected target cells with the
same inhibitors (40, 59). Fig. 6
shows that for both cytosolic and
exocytic versions of NP, presentation of NP5057
and NP366374 is significantly inhibited by
lactacystin. Note that this is readily apparent only under conditions
of limited Ag expression in the case of NP5057
(HP20). In contrast, lactacystin treatment has no effect upon
presentation of NP147155 from
NP13498 and significantly elevates presentation
of this epitope from ER-NP13498. Similar
results were obtained for all three epitopes using the inhibitors
N-acetyl-leucyl-leucyl-nor-leucynal and
Z-L3VS (data not shown).
|
| Discussion |
|---|
|
|
|---|
How can our results be reconciled with the earlier reports (19, 20, 60) showing significant increases in presentation following retargeting of HA and HIV envelope? Townsend et al. (19) showed that presentation of an H-2k-restricted HA-derived epitope was lost when expression was driven by a late vaccinia promoter, and that presentation under these conditions could be regained by redirecting HA to the cytosol through removal of the signal sequence. At that time it was suggested that vaccinia late gene product(s) interferes with Ag processing, but recent evidence suggests that the explanation lies with the limited expression of host proteins involved in presentation that is possible during late phases of the vac replication cycle (61). A simple explanation is that the HA and envelope epitopes assayed for are NP147155-like in this aspect of Ag processing, an idea that cannot be tested at present because we do not understand the basis for the NP147155 presentation phenotype. However, if the two notable properties of NP147155, higher presentation from cytosolic Ag and insensitivity to proteasome inhibitors, are linked, then this explanation would be less likely. Most epitopes (including the murine HIV envelope epitope (62)), are sensitive to the proteasome inhibitors. Of note, a human epitope from HIV envelope that is enhanced by retargeting to the cytosol is presented in a TAP-independent manner, making it difficult to compare with our epitopes (63, 64). Another factor to consider is the relative stabilities of the proteins in the two compartments. Many exocytic proteins, including HA and HIV envelope, are highly unstable when targeted to the cytosol (19, 20, 29, 60), while, as shown in this study, NP13498 is relatively stable in both locations. A number of groups have reported a positive correlation between degradation rate (including NP) and Ag presentation efficiency (19, 20, 22, 23, 24, 52). Thus, the enhanced presentation of retargeted glycoproteins may be due to an increase in degradation rate rather than more direct access to Ag processing machinery. We have tested this possibility preliminarily by destabilizing NP13498 with point mutations predicted to cause misfolding. This manipulation does lead to a significantly higher degradation rate but does not appreciably influence the presentation of the three epitopes described here (T. N. Golovina, unpublished observations). A third consideration is the egress of exocytic proteins from the ER to the plasma membrane, a step that likely jeopardizes the possibility of efficient class I-restricted Ag processing. ER-NP13498 appears to fold properly, based upon binding to several monoclonal anti-NP Abs, and is secreted in detectable amounts, though its release from the ER appears to be slow, based upon the rate at which Endo H resistance is acquired (T. N. Golovina, unpublished observations). This may be due to aberrant interactions between the naturally cytosolic/nuclear protein and the quality control system of the ER and might increase the opportunity for retrotranslocation. However, egress of HIV envelope is also relatively slow (65), and presentation of this protein is markedly enhanced by retargeting to the cytosol (20). Thus, it is presently difficult to gauge the impact that the duration of ER residence has upon presentation efficiency. Experiments are under way to resolve these various issues, but a key point that can be concluded from the data presented here is that the ER membrane provides little impediment to the Ag processing pathway, suggesting that retrotranslocation is a very efficient process. This makes some sense if, as it now appears, retrotranslocation provides the only means for turnover of most ER-resident proteins that fail quality control. A less-efficient process might allow for the accumulation of misfolded and other defective species in the ER.
While the identification of an efficient retrotranslocation system has
obviated the need for other models to explain processing of
glycoproteins, mistargeting to the cytosol does appear to be the
explanation for the presentation of some epitopes. This is the case for
an epitope within HIV envelope that cannot be recognized by a
particular clone when modified by glycosylation. Despite 100%
glycosylation at this site, the epitope is presented, implying direct
delivery of an undetectable fraction of the synthesized protein to the
cytosol (66). The prevalence and relative efficiency of
this pathway remains to be determined, but it is clearly not operable
for NP147155 and several other epitopes that
have been studied here (Fig. 3
) and in experiments that also
exploited glycosylation/deglycosylation-mediated conversion of
asparagine to aspartic acid within the epitope (21, 33, 34, 35).
One might have assumed that once a protein is retrotranslocated it
undergoes qualitatively similar processing as that of default cytosolic
proteins. Our results suggest that this is not the case. While
NP5057 and NP366374 are
generated with comparable efficiency from both locations,
NP147155 is clearly generated with more
efficiency from cytosolic NP. In addition, proteasome inhibitors
enhance presentation of NP147155 from
ER-targeted NP but not from cytosolic NP. There are several possible
explanations for this differential processing. One is that
retrotranslocated proteins have little or no access to nonproteasomal
proteases that have a positive impact upon the generation of
NP147155, due to direct delivery of most
retrotranslocated material to the proteasome. Indeed, the proteasome
appears to participate in the retrotranslocation of at least some
proteins (31, 32). Current efforts are aimed at
determining whether nonproteasomal proteases do play a role in the
generation of NP147155. The neutral or
enhancing effects of proteasome inhibitor on presentation of this
epitope and our identification of a major proteasome cleavage site
within the epitope would appear to support a role for other proteases.
However, the issue is complicated by the recent realization that
current proteasome inhibitors do not inhibit all proteasomal activities
and can, in fact, alter specificity (67). Thus, the
inhibitors might block the activity that destroys
NP147155 while preserving or enhancing the
activity that is necessary for its generation. If proteasomes are
solely responsible for the generation of
NP147155 from either form of NP, another
potential explanation for the differential production of
NP147155 from NP13498
and ER-NP13498 is the delivery of these two
forms to different proteasome populations that generate
NP147155 with differing efficiency. IFN-
stimulation alters the composition of the proteasome by replacing the
constitutive catalytic
subunits of the 20S core (X, Y, and Z) with
their induced counterparts (LMP2, LMP7, and MECL1) and the 19S cap
(attached to one or both ends of the 20S core) with the 11S Reg (PA28)
cap (68). Both modifications have been reported to alter
proteolytic specificity (69, 70, 71). An analysis of
unstimulated primary rat hepatocytes revealed significant
underrepresentation of the constitutive Z subunit and
overrepresentation of the IFN-
-inducible LMP2 subunit (which can be
detected in many unstimulated cell types) in the microsomal fraction
(72). Thus, we have speculated that immunoproteasomes
(68), predisposed to the ER membrane, are less efficient
in generating NP147155 compared with
constitutive proteasomes that are more available in the cytosol.
However, we find no difference in presentation of
NP147155, under limiting conditions of
expression, in IFN-
-treated and untreated cells (T. N.
Golovina, unpublished observations). Another possibility is that
proteasomes with the same subunit composition process both forms of NP
but that association with the ER membrane in some way alters
specificity, as has been shown in the case of proteasome 20S core
association with 11S Reg (PA28)
cap complex (71, 73).
A number of compelling questions about retrotranslocation as it pertains to Ag presentation remain. ER-NP13498 is not tethered via a transmembrane domain to the ER membrane as are many other proteins used in the study of this process, making its efficient presentation all the more notable. It will be interesting to determine how tethering and other modifications such as glycosylation, shown to impact retrotranslocation efficiency (32), affect epitope production. Work on such questions may reveal new avenues in the design of vaccines intended to optimize TCD8+-mediated responses.
| Acknowledgments |
|---|
| Footnotes |
|---|
2 Current address: Rollings Research Center, Atlanta, GA 30322. ![]()
3 Current address: Beirne Carter Center, Charlottesville, VA 22908. ![]()
4 Address correspondence and reprint requests to Dr. Laurence C. Eisenlohr, Department of Microbiology and Immunology, Jefferson Medical College and Kimmel Cancer Institute, Thomas Jefferson University, Bluemle Life Sciences Building, Room 726, 233 South 10th Street, Philadelphia, PA 19107. E-mail address: L_Eisenlohr{at}lac.jci.tju.edu ![]()
5 Abbreviations used in this paper: TCD8+, CD8+ T lymphocyte; Endo H, endoglycosidase H; ER, endoplasmic reticulum; HA, influenza hemagglutinin; HP, hairpin; NP, nucleoprotein; vac, vaccinia virus; rvac, recombinant vac; Z-L3VS, carboxybenzyl-leucyl-leucyl-leucine vinyl sulfone. ![]()
Received for publication October 29, 2001. Accepted for publication January 9, 2002.
| References |
|---|
|
|
|---|
subunits and the Escherichia coli homolog HslV by a new class of inhibitors. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 94:6629.
-
chain complex. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 81:1287.
) binding site on the influenza A virus nucleoprotein NP is a nonconventional nuclear localization signal. J. Virol. 71:1850.[Abstract]
-inducible proteasome activator PA28. Immunol. Rev. 163:161.[Medline]
-Interferon and expression of MHC genes regulate peptide hydrolysis by proteasomes. Nature 365:264.[Medline]
This article has been cited by other articles:
![]() |
P. Berglund, D. Finzi, J. R. Bennink, and J. W. Yewdell Viral Alteration of Cellular Translational Machinery Increases Defective Ribosomal Products J. Virol., July 1, 2007; 81(13): 7220 - 7229. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
E. J. Wherry, T. N. Golovina, S. E. Morrison, G. Sinnathamby, M. J. McElhaugh, D. C. Shockey, and L. C. Eisenlohr Re-evaluating the Generation of a "Proteasome-Independent" MHC Class I-Restricted CD8 T Cell Epitope J. Immunol., February 15, 2006; 176(4): 2249 - 2261. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
F. Bettosini, M. T. Fiorillo, A. Magnacca, L. Leone, M. R. Torrisi, and R. Sorrentino The C Terminus of the Nucleoprotein of Influenza A Virus Delivers Antigens Transduced by Tat to the trans-Golgi Network and Promotes an Efficient Presentation through HLA Class I J. Virol., December 15, 2005; 79(24): 15537 - 15546. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
E. Caron, R. Charbonneau, G. Huppe, S. Brochu, and C. Perreault The structure and location of SIMP/STT3B account for its prominent imprint on the MHC I immunopeptidome Int. Immunol., December 1, 2005; 17(12): 1583 - 1596. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
C. F. Towne, I. A. York, J. Neijssen, M. L. Karow, A. J. Murphy, D. M. Valenzuela, G. D. Yancopoulos, J. J. Neefjes, and K. L. Rock Leucine Aminopeptidase Is Not Essential for Trimming Peptides in the Cytosol or Generating Epitopes for MHC Class I Antigen Presentation J. Immunol., November 15, 2005; 175(10): 6605 - 6614. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
T. N. Golovina, S. E. Morrison, and L. C. Eisenlohr The Impact of Misfolding versus Targeted Degradation on the Efficiency of the MHC Class I-Restricted Antigen Processing J. Immunol., March 1, 2005; 174(5): 2763 - 2769. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
G. Sinnathamby and L. C. Eisenlohr Presentation by Recycling MHC Class II Molecules of an Influenza Hemagglutinin-Derived Epitope That Is Revealed in the Early Endosome by Acidification J. Immunol., April 1, 2003; 170(7): 3504 - 3513. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| HOME | HELP | FEEDBACK | SUBSCRIPTIONS | ARCHIVE | SEARCH | TABLE OF CONTENTS |