1. Biochemistry and Chemical Biology
  2. Immunology and Inflammation
Download icon

In vitro proteasome processing of neo-splicetopes does not predict their presentation in vivo

  1. Gerald Willimsky  Is a corresponding author
  2. Christin Beier
  3. Lena Immisch
  4. Georgios Papafotiou
  5. Vivian Scheuplein-Schlosser
  6. Andrean Goede
  7. Hermann-Georg Holzhütter
  8. Thomas Blankenstein
  9. Peter M Kloetzel  Is a corresponding author
  1. Institute of Immunology (Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin) and German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ Heidelberg), Germany
  2. Institute of Biochemistry (Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin), Germany
  3. Max-Delbrück Center for Molecular Medicine, Germany
  4. Institut für Physiologie (Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin), Germany
  5. Max Delbrück Center for Molecular Medicine in Helmholtz Association, Germany
  6. Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Germany
Research Article
  • Cited 3
  • Views 1,272
  • Annotations
Cite this article as: eLife 2021;10:e62019 doi: 10.7554/eLife.62019

Abstract

Proteasome catalyzed peptide splicing (PCPS) of cancer-driving antigens could generate attractive neoepitopes to be targeted by TCR-based adoptive T cell therapy. Based on a spliced peptide prediction algorithm TCRs were generated against putative KRASG12V and RAC2P29L derived neo-splicetopes with high HLA-A*02:01 binding affinity. TCRs generated in mice with a diverse human TCR repertoire specifically recognized the respective target peptides with high efficacy. However, we failed to detect any neo-splicetope specific T cell response when testing the in vivo neo-splicetope generation and obtained no experimental evidence that the putative KRASG12V- and RAC2P29L-derived neo-splicetopes were naturally processed and presented. Furthermore, only the putative RAC2P29L-derived neo-splicetopes was generated by in vitro PCPS. The experiments pose severe questions on the notion that available algorithms or the in vitro PCPS reaction reliably simulate in vivo splicing and argue against the general applicability of an algorithm-driven 'reverse immunology' pipeline for the identification of cancer-specific neo-splicetopes.

Data availability

Additional source data comprising databases for ProteomDiscoverer, Kras/RAC2 kinetics, cleavage maps and PD2.1 result files have been submitted to Dryad under DOI:10.5061/dryad.jq2bvq88b

The following data sets were generated

Article and author information

Author details

  1. Gerald Willimsky

    Experimental and Translational Cancer Immunology, Institute of Immunology (Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin) and German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ Heidelberg), Berlin, Germany
    For correspondence
    gerald.willimsky@charite.de
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0002-9693-948X
  2. Christin Beier

    Biochemistry, Institute of Biochemistry (Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin), Berlin, Germany
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  3. Lena Immisch

    Experimental and Translational Cancer Immunology, Institute of Immunology (Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin) and German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ Heidelberg), Berlin, Germany
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  4. Georgios Papafotiou

    Experimental and Translational Cancer Immunology, Institute of Immunology (Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin) and German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ Heidelberg), Berlin, Germany
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  5. Vivian Scheuplein-Schlosser

    Molecular Immunology, Max-Delbrück Center for Molecular Medicine, Berlin, Germany
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  6. Andrean Goede

    Physiologie (, Institut für Physiologie (Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin), Berlin, Germany
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0002-9044-9869
  7. Hermann-Georg Holzhütter

    Biochemistry, Institute of Biochemistry (Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin), Berlin, Germany
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  8. Thomas Blankenstein

    Max Delbrück Center for Molecular Medicine in Helmholtz Association, Berlin, Germany
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  9. Peter M Kloetzel

    Institut für Biochemie, Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Berlin, Germany
    For correspondence
    p-m.kloetzel@charite.de
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.

Funding

Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (SFB-TR36)

  • Gerald Willimsky
  • Thomas Blankenstein

Deutsche Krebshilfe (111546)

  • Gerald Willimsky

Berlin Institute of Health (CRG-1)

  • Thomas Blankenstein
  • Peter M Kloetzel

DKTK joint funding (NEO-ATT)

  • Gerald Willimsky

Berliner Krebsgesellschaft

  • Peter M Kloetzel

Helmholtz-Gemeinschaft, Zukunftsthema 'Immunology and Inflammation'

  • Gerald Willimsky
  • Thomas Blankenstein

The funders had no role in study design, data collection and interpretation, or the decision to submit the work for publication.

Ethics

Animal experimentation: All animal experiments were performed according to institutional and national guidelines and regulations. The experiments were approved by the governmental authority (Landesamt für Gesundheit und Soziales, Berlin, H0086/16).

Reviewing Editor

  1. Vincenzo Cerullo, University of Helsinki, Finland

Publication history

  1. Received: August 11, 2020
  2. Accepted: April 15, 2021
  3. Accepted Manuscript published: April 20, 2021 (version 1)
  4. Accepted Manuscript updated: April 22, 2021 (version 2)
  5. Version of Record published: May 26, 2021 (version 3)

Copyright

© 2021, Willimsky et al.

This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License permitting unrestricted use and redistribution provided that the original author and source are credited.

Metrics

  • 1,272
    Page views
  • 190
    Downloads
  • 3
    Citations

Article citation count generated by polling the highest count across the following sources: Crossref, PubMed Central, Scopus.

Download links

A two-part list of links to download the article, or parts of the article, in various formats.

Downloads (link to download the article as PDF)

Download citations (links to download the citations from this article in formats compatible with various reference manager tools)

Open citations (links to open the citations from this article in various online reference manager services)

  1. Further reading

Further reading

    1. Biochemistry and Chemical Biology
    Xiaozheng Xu et al.
    Research Article Updated

    A large number of inhibitory receptors recruit SHP1 and/or SHP2, tandem-SH2-containing phosphatases through phosphotyrosine-based motifs immunoreceptor tyrosine-based inhibitory motif (ITIM) and immunoreceptor tyrosine-based switch motif (ITSM). Despite the similarity, these receptors exhibit differential effector binding specificities, as exemplified by the immune checkpoint receptors PD-1 and BTLA, which preferentially recruit SHP2 and SHP1, respectively. The molecular basis by which structurally similar receptors discriminate SHP1 and SHP2 is unclear. Here, we provide evidence that human PD-1 and BTLA optimally bind to SHP1 and SHP2 via a bivalent, parallel mode that involves both SH2 domains of SHP1 or SHP2. PD-1 mainly uses its ITSM to prefer SHP2 over SHP1 via their C-terminal SH2 domains (cSH2): swapping SHP1-cSH2 with SHP2-cSH2 enabled PD-1:SHP1 association in T cells. In contrast, BTLA primarily utilizes its ITIM to prefer SHP1 over SHP2 via their N-terminal SH2 domains (nSH2). The ITIM of PD-1, however, appeared to be de-emphasized due to a glycine at pY+1 position. Substitution of this glycine with alanine, a residue conserved in BTLA and several SHP1-recruiting receptors, was sufficient to induce PD-1:SHP1 interaction in T cells. Finally, structural simulation and mutagenesis screening showed that SHP1 recruitment activity exhibits a bell-shaped dependence on the molecular volume of the pY+1 residue of ITIM. Collectively, we provide a molecular interpretation of the SHP1/SHP2-binding specificities of PD-1 and BTLA, with implications for the mechanisms of a large family of therapeutically relevant receptors.

    1. Biochemistry and Chemical Biology
    2. Structural Biology and Molecular Biophysics
    Yongjian Huang et al.
    Research Article

    The epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) is a receptor tyrosine kinase that couples the binding of extracellular ligands, such as EGF and transforming growth factor-α (TGF-α), to the initiation of intracellular signaling pathways. EGFR binds to EGF and TGF-α with similar affinity, but generates different signals from these ligands. To address the mechanistic basis of this phenomenon, we have carried out cryo-EM analyses of human EGFR bound to EGF and TGF-α. We show that the extracellular module adopts an ensemble of dimeric conformations when bound to either EGF or TGF-α. The two extreme states of this ensemble represent distinct ligand-bound quaternary structures in which the membrane-proximal tips of the extracellular module are either juxtaposed or separated. EGF and TGF-α differ in their ability to maintain the conformation with the membrane-proximal tips of the extracellular module separated, and this conformation is stabilized preferentially by an oncogenic EGFR mutation. Close proximity of the transmembrane helices at the junction with the extracellular module has been associated previously with increased EGFR activity. Our results show how EGFR can couple the binding of different ligands to differential modulation of this proximity, thereby suggesting a molecular mechanism for the generation of ligand-sensitive differential outputs in this receptor family.