Trends in Immunology
Volume 34, Issue 10, October 2013, Pages 495-501
Journal home page for Trends in Immunology

Review
Mechanisms of peptide repertoire selection by HLA-DM

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.it.2013.06.002Get rights and content

Highlights

  • HLA-DM stabilizes empty HLA-DR1 through major conformational changes of the groove.

  • These conformational changes enable a rapid peptide selection process.

  • HLA-DO acts as a substrate mimic that blocks HLA-DM activity.

  • HLA-DO lacks key residues required for stable peptide binding.

Recently, crystal structures of key complexes in antigen presentation have been reported. HLA-DM functions in antigen presentation by catalyzing dissociation of an invariant chain remnant from the peptide binding groove and stabilizing empty MHC class II proteins in a peptide-receptive conformation. The crystal structure of a MHC class II–HLA-DM complex explains how HLA-DM stabilizes an otherwise short-lived transition state and promotes a rapid peptide exchange process that favors the highest-affinity ligands. HLA-DO has sequence similarity with MHC class II molecules yet inhibits antigen presentation. The structure of the HLA-DO–HLA-DM complex shows that it blocks HLA-DM activity as a substrate mimic. Alterations in the efficiency of DM-mediated peptide selection may contribute to autoimmune pathologies, which will be an exciting area for future investigation.

Section snippets

MHC class II pathway

When an infectious agent enters the body at a localized anatomical site, the small number of naïve T cells available for a particular pathogen-derived peptide (20– approximately 200 CD4 T cells in mice) need to locate the relevant antigen-presenting cells (APCs) [1]. This search operation requires that relevant peptides are displayed for sufficient periods of time on the surface of APCs for interaction with naïve T cells. MHC class II (MHCII) molecules have evolved to present peptides for

DM-mediated peptide repertoire selection

DM was discovered by characterization of mutant Epstein–Barr-virus-transformed B cell lines with a severe but incomplete defect in antigen presentation by multiple human MHCII molecules (HLA-DR, HLA-DQ, and HLA-DP) [7]. MHCII molecules have a strong tendency to aggregate when the binding groove is not occupied by peptides. They assemble in the endoplasmic reticulum (ER) with the invariant chain, which protects the binding groove until MHCII-invariant chain complexes reach the late endosomal

DM binds a short-lived MHCII conformer

Much effort has been devoted to determine the molecular mechanism for the three functional properties of DM described above: destabilization of all MHCII–peptide complexes including those formed with CLIP; stabilization of an empty MHCII groove; and editing of the peptide repertoire. DM has a similar domain organization as MHCII proteins, but lacks the ability to bind peptides [5]. Extensive mutagenesis experiments on HLA-DR (DR, a human MHCII protein) and DM identified large lateral surfaces

Crystal structure of the DR1–DM complex

These functional studies enabled crystallization of this important complex [17]. An N-terminally truncated peptide was covalently linked to the DR1 molecule, through a disulfide bond in the P6 pocket. Furthermore, the β chains of DM and DR1 were linked using sortase A to mimic membrane tethering of DM and DR (which enhances the interaction between the two molecules) 17, 18.

The structure shows that the interaction is dominated by the DRα and DMα chains (Figure 1), and there is also a smaller

Inhibition of DM by DO

HLA-DO (H-2O in mice) has a similar structural organization as classical MHCII molecules and more sequence similarity to MHCII proteins (∼60%) than DM (∼28%). The assembly of DO heterodimers is inefficient in the absence of DM, and DM is needed for egress from the ER. DO forms long-lived complexes with DM and inhibits the catalytic activity of DM [20]. Its expression is specifically downregulated in germinal center B cells relative to naïve B cells, enhancing MHCII antigen presentation by

Why does DO fail to bind peptides?

The recent crystal structure of the DO–DM complex shows that DO is indeed an MHCII homolog and inhibits DM function by acting as a substrate mimic 25, 26. The overall topology of DO is similar to that of classical MHCII proteins. Despite this similarity, the groove flanked by the DOα and β helices is empty in the structure of the DO–DM complex. Why does DO apparently not bind peptide, despite structural similarity to MHCII molecules? As mentioned above, peptide binding by all MHCII proteins

How does DM interact with DR or DO?

DO functions as a competitive and essentially irreversible inhibitor of DM activity. DM is expressed at a higher level than DO, which results in a mix of free DM (active) and DO–DM complexes (inactive) [20]. As a substrate mimic, DO interacts with a similar surface of DM as DR1. However, DR1 and DO differ at several positions at their interface with DM (Figure 4). A conserved feature among DO–DM and DR1–DM complexes is the interaction between DR and DOα W43 with DMα N125 17, 25. However, there

Relevance to peptide selection by MHC class I (MHCI) molecules

Both MHCI and MHCII molecules are highly unstable in the absence of peptide. In fact, recombinant MHCI molecules can only be refolded from the relevant subunits (extracellular domain of MHCI heavy chain and β2-microglobulin) in the presence of a peptide. Even though MHCI and MHCII proteins acquire peptides in different compartments and utilize different proteins to facilitate the loading process, there are important similarities in the general requirements for peptide acquisition. The MHCI

Relevance to pathogenesis of autoimmunity

A substantial number of polymorphic HLA-DQ and HLA-DP residues are located at the putative interface with DM. It has already been shown that HLA-DQ2, which is associated with susceptibility to type 1 diabetes and celiac disease interacts poorly with DM 11, 29, 30. This raises the question whether insufficient editing of low-affinity peptides may predispose to certain autoimmune diseases. This hypothesis is supported by the fact that key T cell epitopes in animal models of type 1 diabetes and

Concluding remarks

These results provide a structural foundation for understanding key processes in antigen presentation by MHCII molecules. It has long been thought that DM forces peptide dissociation by changing the conformation of MHCII–peptide complexes. The new studies reveal that DM only binds to a short-lived transition state in which part of the MHCII groove is already empty. DM stabilizes this site and favors a rapid exchange process for selection of the highest-affinity ligands. This process removes

Acknowledgments

We would like to thank Melissa J. Call, Monika-Sarah E. D. Schulze, Anne-Kathrin Anders, Jason Pyrdol, and Eric J. Sundberg for their important contributions to work reviewed here. This work was supported by grants from the National Institutes of Health (RO1 NS044914 and PO1 AI045757 to K.W.W.), postdoctoral fellowships from The National Multiple Sclerosis Society (D.K.S.) and the American Diabetes Association (W.P.).

References (34)

  • R. Busch

    Achieving stability through editing and chaperoning: regulation of MHC class II peptide binding and expression

    Immunol. Rev.

    (2005)
  • P. Morris

    An essential role for HLA-DM in antigen presentation by class II major histocompatibility molecules

    Nature

    (1994)
  • N.S. Patil

    Rheumatoid arthritis (RA)-associated HLA-DR alleles form less stable complexes with class II-associated invariant chain peptide than non-RA-associated HLA-DR alleles

    J. Immunol.

    (2001)
  • A.J. Sant

    The relationship between immunodominance, DM editing, and the kinetic stability of MHC class II:peptide complexes

    Immunol. Rev.

    (2005)
  • R. Busch

    On the perils of poor editing: regulation of peptide loading by HLA-DQ and H2-A molecules associated with celiac disease and type 1 diabetes

    Expert Rev. Mol. Med.

    (2012)
  • S.B. Lovitch

    Cutting edge: H-2DM is responsible for the large differences in presentation among peptides selected by I-Ak during antigen processing

    J. Immunol.

    (2003)
  • C.R. Doebele

    Determination of the HLA-DM interaction site on HLA-DR molecules

    Immunity

    (2000)
  • Cited by (0)

    View full text