Computational Design of the Affinity and Specificity of a Therapeutic T Cell Receptor

T cell receptors (TCRs) are key to antigen-specific immunity and are increasingly being explored as therapeutics, most visibly in cancer immunotherapy. As TCRs typically possess only low-to-moderate affinity for their peptide/MHC (pMHC) ligands, there is a recognized need to develop affinity-enhanced TCR variants. Previous in vitro engineering efforts have yielded remarkable improvements in TCR affinity, yet concerns exist about the maintenance of peptide specificity and the biological impacts of ultra-high affinity. As opposed to in vitro engineering, computational design can directly address these issues, in theory permitting the rational control of peptide specificity together with relatively controlled increments in affinity. Here we explored the efficacy of computational design with the clinically relevant TCR DMF5, which recognizes nonameric and decameric epitopes from the melanoma-associated Melan-A/MART-1 protein presented by the class I MHC HLA-A2. We tested multiple mutations selected by flexible and rigid modeling protocols, assessed impacts on affinity and specificity, and utilized the data to examine and improve algorithmic performance. We identified multiple mutations that improved binding affinity, and characterized the structure, affinity, and binding kinetics of a previously reported double mutant that exhibits an impressive 400-fold affinity improvement for the decameric pMHC ligand without detectable binding to non-cognate ligands. The structure of this high affinity mutant indicated very little conformational consequences and emphasized the high fidelity of our modeling procedure. Overall, our work showcases the capability of computational design to generate TCRs with improved pMHC affinities while explicitly accounting for peptide specificity, as well as its potential for generating TCRs with customized antigen targeting capabilities.

[1]  Zhiping Weng,et al.  Backbone flexibility of CDR3 and immune recognition of antigens. , 2014, Journal of molecular biology.

[2]  Jennifer A. McWilliams,et al.  Relating TCR-peptide-MHC affinity to immunogenicity for the design of tumor vaccines. , 2006, The Journal of clinical investigation.

[3]  Zhiping Weng,et al.  Structure‐based design of a T‐cell receptor leads to nearly 100‐fold improvement in binding affinity for pepMHC , 2009, Proteins.

[4]  Brian Kuhlman,et al.  Computational design of second‐site suppressor mutations at protein–protein interfaces , 2010, Proteins.

[5]  Brian M Baker,et al.  Structures of MART-126/27-35 Peptide/HLA-A2 complexes reveal a remarkable disconnect between antigen structural homology and T cell recognition. , 2007, Journal of molecular biology.

[6]  J Alexander,et al.  Optimizing vaccine design for cellular processing, MHC binding and TCR recognition. , 2002, Tissue antigens.

[7]  Julie C. Mitchell,et al.  Community‐wide evaluation of methods for predicting the effect of mutations on protein–protein interactions , 2013, Proteins.

[8]  S. Rosenberg,et al.  Modulating the differentiation status of ex vivo-cultured anti-tumor T cells using cytokine cocktails , 2013, Cancer Immunology, Immunotherapy.

[9]  J. Thornton,et al.  Satisfying hydrogen bonding potential in proteins. , 1994, Journal of molecular biology.

[10]  S. Rosenberg,et al.  Cancer Regression in Patients After Transfer of Genetically Engineered Lymphocytes , 2006, Science.

[11]  Z. Weng,et al.  Combinations of affinity-enhancing mutations in a T cell receptor reveal highly nonadditive effects within and between complementarity determining regions and chains. , 2010, Biochemistry.

[12]  R. Mariuzza,et al.  Structural basis for self‐recognition by autoimmune T‐cell receptors , 2012, Immunological reviews.

[13]  Adam Bagg,et al.  Cardiovascular toxicity and titin cross-reactivity of affinity-enhanced T cells in myeloma and melanoma. , 2013, Blood.

[14]  P. Katsamba,et al.  Analyzing a kinetic titration series using affinity biosensors. , 2006, Analytical biochemistry.

[15]  David M. Kranz,et al.  Role of T Cell Receptor Affinity in the Efficacy and Specificity of Adoptive T Cell Therapies , 2013, Front. Immunol..

[16]  Olivier Michielin,et al.  Interplay between T Cell Receptor Binding Kinetics and the Level of Cognate Peptide Presented by Major Histocompatibility Complexes Governs CD8+ T Cell Responsiveness* , 2012, The Journal of Biological Chemistry.

[17]  Daniel Coombs,et al.  Dependence of T Cell Antigen Recognition on T Cell Receptor-Peptide MHC Confinement Time , 2010, Immunity.

[18]  J. Boulter,et al.  Crystal structures of high affinity human T-cell receptors bound to peptide major histocompatibility complex reveal native diagonal binding geometry. , 2007, Protein engineering, design & selection : PEDS.

[19]  David M Kranz,et al.  Class II-restricted T cell receptor engineered in vitro for higher affinity retains peptide specificity and function. , 2005, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[20]  Tirso Pons,et al.  Homology modeling, model and software evaluation: three related resources , 1998, Bioinform..

[21]  Zhiping Weng,et al.  Cutting Edge: Evidence for a Dynamically Driven T Cell Signaling Mechanism , 2012, The Journal of Immunology.

[22]  D. Kranz,et al.  T‐cell receptor binding affinities and kinetics: impact on T‐cell activity and specificity , 2009, Immunology.

[23]  B. Baker,et al.  Disparate degrees of hypervariable loop flexibility control T-cell receptor cross-reactivity, specificity, and binding mechanism. , 2011, Journal of molecular biology.

[24]  Yi Li,et al.  Directed evolution of human T cell receptor CDR2 residues by phage display dramatically enhances affinity for cognate peptide‐MHC without increasing apparent cross‐reactivity , 2006, Protein science : a publication of the Protein Society.

[25]  Z. Weng,et al.  Main‐chain conformational tendencies of amino acids , 2005, Proteins.

[26]  K D Wittrup,et al.  In vitro evolution of a T cell receptor with high affinity for peptide/MHC. , 2000, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[27]  Brian M Baker,et al.  Two different T cell receptors use different thermodynamic strategies to recognize the same peptide/MHC ligand. , 2005, Journal of molecular biology.

[28]  D. Baker,et al.  A simple physical model for binding energy hot spots in protein–protein complexes , 2002, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[29]  Kevin Cowtan,et al.  research papers Acta Crystallographica Section D Biological , 2005 .

[30]  K. Garcia,et al.  How a Single T Cell Receptor Recognizes Both Self and Foreign MHC , 2007, Cell.

[31]  B. Baker,et al.  Increased Immunogenicity of an Anchor-Modified Tumor-Associated Antigen Is Due to the Enhanced Stability of the Peptide/MHC Complex: Implications for Vaccine Design1 , 2005, The Journal of Immunology.

[32]  Robyn L Stanfield,et al.  How TCRs bind MHCs, peptides, and coreceptors. , 2006, Annual review of immunology.

[33]  V. Zoete,et al.  MM–GBSA binding free energy decomposition and T cell receptor engineering , 2010, Journal of molecular recognition : JMR.

[34]  Zhiping Weng,et al.  Prediction of protein–protein binding free energies , 2012, Protein science : a publication of the Protein Society.

[35]  Pierre Baldi,et al.  A CROC stronger than ROC: measuring, visualizing and optimizing early retrieval , 2010, Bioinform..

[36]  S. Rosenberg,et al.  Successful Treatment of Melanoma Brain Metastases with Adoptive Cell Therapy , 2010, Clinical Cancer Research.

[37]  S. Rosenberg,et al.  Gene Transfer of Tumor-Reactive TCR Confers Both High Avidity and Tumor Reactivity to Nonreactive Peripheral Blood Mononuclear Cells and Tumor-Infiltrating Lymphocytes1 , 2006, The Journal of Immunology.

[38]  S. Rosenberg,et al.  Gene therapy with human and mouse T-cell receptors mediates cancer regression and targets normal tissues expressing cognate antigen. , 2009, Blood.

[39]  Partho Ghosh,et al.  The Structure and Stability of an HLA-A*0201/Octameric Tax Peptide Complex with an Empty Conserved Peptide-N-Terminal Binding Site1 , 2000, The Journal of Immunology.

[40]  Vincent B. Chen,et al.  Correspondence e-mail: , 2000 .

[41]  G. Gao,et al.  Germ Line-governed Recognition of a Cancer Epitope by an Immunodominant Human T-cell Receptor* , 2009, The Journal of Biological Chemistry.

[42]  Bent K. Jakobsen,et al.  Single and Dual Amino Acid Substitutions in TCR CDRs Can Enhance Antigen-Specific T Cell Functions , 2008, The Journal of Immunology.

[43]  K. Garcia,et al.  Different thermodynamic binding mechanisms and peptide fine specificities associated with a panel of structurally similar high-affinity T cell receptors. , 2008, Biochemistry.

[44]  Zhiping Weng,et al.  ZRANK: Reranking protein docking predictions with an optimized energy function , 2007, Proteins.

[45]  M. Raffeld,et al.  Tumor regression in patients with metastatic synovial cell sarcoma and melanoma using genetically engineered lymphocytes reactive with NY-ESO-1. , 2011, Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology.

[46]  Yi Li,et al.  Design of Soluble Recombinant T Cell Receptors for Antigen Targeting and T Cell Inhibition* , 2005, Journal of Biological Chemistry.

[47]  Yvonne McGrath,et al.  Monoclonal TCR-redirected tumor cell killing , 2012, Nature Medicine.

[48]  Kurt H Piepenbrink,et al.  T cell receptor cross-reactivity directed by antigen-dependent tuning of peptide-MHC molecular flexibility. , 2009, Immunity.

[49]  Brian M. Baker,et al.  The basis for limited specificity and MHC restriction in a T cell receptor interface , 2013, Nature Communications.

[50]  Randy J. Read,et al.  Iterative-build OMIT maps: map improvement by iterative model building and refinement without model bias , 2008, Acta crystallographica. Section D, Biological crystallography.

[51]  Nicholas A Williamson,et al.  A T cell receptor flattens a bulged antigenic peptide presented by a major histocompatibility complex class I molecule , 2007, Nature Immunology.

[52]  Z. Weng,et al.  A flexible docking approach for prediction of T cell receptor–peptide–MHC complexes , 2013, Protein science : a publication of the Protein Society.

[53]  Yi Li,et al.  Directed evolution of human T-cell receptors with picomolar affinities by phage display , 2005, Nature Biotechnology.

[54]  J. Allison,et al.  Attenuated T Cell Responses to a High-Potency Ligand In Vivo , 2010, PLoS biology.

[55]  Andrew Leaver-Fay,et al.  A Generic Program for Multistate Protein Design , 2011, PloS one.

[56]  B. Baker,et al.  TCRs Used in Cancer Gene Therapy Cross-React with MART-1/Melan-A Tumor Antigens via Distinct Mechanisms , 2011, The Journal of Immunology.

[57]  Brian M. Baker,et al.  Conformational changes and flexibility in T-cell receptor recognition of peptide–MHC complexes , 2008, The Biochemical journal.

[58]  Steven A. Rosenberg,et al.  Raising the Bar: The Curative Potential of Human Cancer Immunotherapy , 2012, Science Translational Medicine.

[59]  W. Delano The PyMOL Molecular Graphics System , 2002 .

[60]  Yi Li,et al.  T-cell Receptor Specificity Maintained by Altered Thermodynamics* , 2013, The Journal of Biological Chemistry.

[61]  Gregory Lizée,et al.  Harnessing the power of the immune system to target cancer. , 2013, Annual review of medicine.

[62]  David M Kranz,et al.  Long-range cooperative binding effects in a T cell receptor variable domain. , 2006, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.