T cell receptor signaling and cell immunotherapy

Linsong Zhang; Xinyi Xu; Xiaoshan Shi; Chenqi Xu

doi:10.1360/nso/20230087

All issues

Volume 3 / No 4 (2024)

Natl Sci Open, 3 4 (2024) 20230087

Full HTML

Open Access

Review

Issue		Natl Sci Open Volume 3, Number 4, 2024


Article Number		20230087
Number of page(s)		16
Section		Life Sciences and Medicine
DOI		https://doi.org/10.1360/nso/20230087
Published online		15 March 2024

National Science Open 3: 20230087, 2024

REVIEW

T cell receptor signaling and cell immunotherapy

Linsong Zhang¹^,#, Xinyi Xu²^,#, Xiaoshan Shi¹^,#^,* and Chenqi Xu²^*

¹ Key Laboratory of Quantitative Synthetic Biology, Shenzhen Institute of Synthetic Biology, Shenzhen Institute of Advanced Technology, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Shenzhen 518055, China
² State Key Laboratory of Molecular Biology, CAS Center for Excellence in Molecular Cell Science, Shanghai Institute of Biochemistry and Cell Biology; University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Shanghai 200031, China

^* Correspondence authors (emails: cqxu@sibcb.ac.cn (Chenqi Xu); xs.shi@siat.ac.cn (Xiaoshan Shi))

Received: 23 December 2023
Revised: 25 February 2024
Accepted: 14 March 2024

Abstract

As the major sensor of adaptive immune system, T cell receptor (TCR) can recognize diverse antigens and initiate specific immune responses against invading pathogens and cancer cells. Understanding the mechanisms of TCR signaling has led to the development of engineered T cell therapies, which have extensive applications in the treatment of diseases such as cancer, infection and autoimmunity. Here, we review the current understanding of antigen-induced TCR signaling and discuss its applications in T cell therapies.

Key words: T cell receptor-CD3 complex / signaling / T cell therapy

^#

Contributed equally to this work.

© The Author(s) 2024. Published by Science Press and EDP Sciences.

This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

INTRODUCTION

As an indispensable part of the adaptive immune system, T cells are responsible for recognizing non-self antigens carried by pathogens and cancer cells to mount immunosurveillance [1]. T cell receptor (TCR) is the primary antigen sensor on the surface of T cells and its signaling is essential for T cell development and functions. Based on the expression of TCR types, T cells can be categorized into two major types: αβ T cells and γδ T cells, with αβ T cells constituting more than 95% of the T cell population [2,3]. Therefore, αβ T cells have been the research focus in recent decades, and here we mainly discuss the works of αβ TCR (TCR, hereafter).

ORGANIZATION AND STRUCTURE OF TCR

In order to effectively navigate the intricate external and internal environment, TCR needs to recognize extremely diverse antigens presented by major histocompatibility complexes (MHCs) with specificity and sensitivity [4–8]. Therefore, TCR has evolved into one of the most sophisticated cell surface receptors composed of four dimeric subunits, including the antigen-recognizing subunit TCRαβ, and signaling subunits CD3γε, CD3δε, and CD3ζζ (Figure 1).

Figure 1

Structure, antigen recognition, triggering and signal output mechanisms of TCR-CD3 complex.

The antigen-recognizing subunit TCRαβ is composed of an α chain and a β chain connected by disulfide bonds. Each chain contains an extracellular variable region (V region) domain, a constant region (C region) domain, a transmembrane domain, and a short intracellular domain [3,9]. The C region domain and the transmembrane domain are responsible for the assembly of the TCR complex and the subsequent transmission of antigen signals in the TCR complex, while the short intracellular domain is generally considered to be non-functional. The V region domain is the functional region involved in antigen recognition, containing three complementarity-determining regions (CDR): CDR1, CDR2, and CDR3 [10]. Producing variable regions (V regions), diversity regions (D regions), and joining regions (J regions), the TCRα gene includes Vα and Jα segments, and the TCRβ gene includes Vβ, Dβ, and Jβ segments. V(D)Js are linked by non-homologous end joining with the assistance of RAG recombinase and DNA repair proteins, resulting in diverse TCRα and TCRβ. The paired heterodimers of α and β chains further increase the variability of combinations [10–12]. Theoretically, V(D)J recombination can generate more than 10¹⁵ possible TCRs in human species, and an individual has approximately 2×10⁷ TCRs after thymic selection [11,13–15]. CDR1 and CDR2 are encoded by the V region of TCR, and mainly interact with the terminus of the antigen peptide and the α-helix on the surface of MHC, respectively [15–17]. CDR3, the most variable among the three CDR regions, is encoded by the V(D)J junction and is responsible for recognizing various antigen peptide.

Due to the short cytoplasmic domain of TCRαβ, the function of transmitting antigenic signals is exerted by CD3γε, CD3δε, and CD3ζζ [18,19]. The extracellular regions of CD3γ, CD3δ, and CD3ε consist of Immunoglobin (Ig)-like domains, whereas the extracellular region of CD3ζ is very short. The α chain and the β chain interact with CD3 chains through electrostatic and hydrophobic interaction in their transmembrane domains. These domains collectively mediate the assembly of the TCR complex and potentially regulate the transmission of subsequent antigenic signals within the complex. The intracellular regions of the CD3 chains all contain immunoreceptor tyrosine-based activation motifs (ITAMs), and each ITAM contains two tyrosine sites that can be phosphorylated to facilitate signal transduction into the cell. CD3γ, CD3δ, and CD3ε each have one ITAM, while CD3ζ contains three ITAMs [20]. Additionally, apart from ITAMs, CD3γ and CD3δ each have a Di-Leucine motif, CD3ε has a basic residue-rich sequence (BRS), an “RKGQRxxY” (RK) motif, and a proline-rich sequence (PRS), and CD3ζ contains multiple BRSs between ITAMs. All of these motifs may play a role in signal transduction [21,22] (Figure 1).

In 2019, the cryo-electron microscopy (cryo-EM) structure of the TCR-CD3 complex with a resolution of 3.7 Å was reported, revealing a detailed structural assembly mechanism of TCRαβ/CD3δγ/CD3γε/CD3ζζ with the stoichiometric ratio of 1:1:1:1 [23]. This structure revealed the folding of each protein, the formation of intramolecular and intermolecular disulfide bonds, the interaction between the extracellular Ig-like domains of each protein, and the involvement of salt bridges and hydrophobic interactions in the transmembrane regions. Additional cryo-EM structural analysis unveiled a cholesterol-binding tunnel (CBT) formed by TCRα/β and CD3ζ/γ, capable of recognizing two cholesterol molecules. This suggests that cholesterol is involved in the assembly of the transmembrane region [24]. A recent work on the cryo-EM structure of TCR-CD3 complex in a native-like nanodisc lipid bilayer revealed new “closed and compacted” conformations that are distinct from previously reported structures of receptors in detergent. The conformations showed a “closure” of the TCR extracellular domains against the CD3 extracellular domains and a “compaction” of the juxtamembrane linker peptides that contact with the outer leaflet of the membrane, accompanied by rotations of TM helices. These conformations may represent the unliganded resting state for the TCR-CD3 complex in vivo, and suggest a membrane environment-mediated allosteric mechanism upon antigen triggering [25]. Nonetheless, the information regarding the critical intracellular regions of the signaling CD3s is lacking due to their dynamic nature. It should be pointed out that the intracellular domain of CD3ε and CD3ζ carrying BRSs can interact electrostatically with acidic phospholipids in the inner-leaflet layer of the plasma membrane, and this interaction induces amphipathic helical folding of ITAMs [26–30]. Consequently, critical tyrosine residues become embedded in the hydrophobic core of the membrane bilayer [27,29]. These protein-lipid interactions lock the TCR in a resting or inactive conformation, while also facilitating the formation of TCR oligomers to rapidly transmit antigenic signals [31–35].

DIVERSE ANTIGEN RECOGNITION MECHANISMS OF TCR

The antigen recognition process of TCR involves TCR-antigen and TCR-MHC interactions. Due to the tremendous variations of each module, there is a high level of diversity at the interface between TCR and peptide-MHC complex (pMHC). Several antigen recognition mechanisms have been proposed and summarized, including induced fit based on TCR and pMHC plasticity or flexibility, differential docking, structural degeneracy, and molecular mimicry [36–39] (Figure 1).

In general, TCR can interact with different pMHC by adopting different docking angles and changing conformations bilaterally to accommodate TCR-pMHC interaction. Various factors, such as shape complementarity, hydrogen bonding, salt bridging and Van der Waals force, can redundantly create similar physical and chemical characteristics that allow for the tolerance of sequence substitutions in paired antigens and TCRs. This sequence tolerance, named as cross-reactivity, enables a limited number of TCRs to recognize a larger pool of antigens but also increases the risk of undesired recognition [36]. For example, exposure to a pathogen can alter the immune response to a subsequent unrelated pathogen, resulting in either protective or pathogenic outcomes [40].

DIVERSE TCR TRIGGERING MECHANISMS

The TCR triggering process is to convert the antigen signal from the extracellular antigen-recognizing domain of TCRαβ to the intracellular domains of CD3 in order to recruit downstream proteins. Previous studies have primarily focused on exploring the mechanism by which antigen signals are converted into phosphorylation signals, as the recruitment of downstream proteins by CD3 mainly relies on the phosphorylation of ITAMs. Lck and Fyn kinases mediate the phosphorylation process of the CD3 chains, while CD45, SHP-1, and SHP-2 phosphatases mediate the dephosphorylation process [41–44]. In essence, TCR triggering involves modulating the phosphorylation/dephosphorylation equilibrium by either promoting kinase-mediated phosphorylation or inhibiting phosphatase-mediated dephosphorylation.

There are five major models of TCR triggering, addressing the question from either physical or chemical angle. The physical models include the Allosteric and Mechano-sensing model, while the chemical models include TCR clustering, Lck recruitment, and CD45 segregation (Figure 1). It is worth noting that these models are not mutually exclusive but can act synergistically to enhance sensitivity and specificity.

Allosteric model

The interaction between pMHC and TCR complex leads to conformational changes in TCR extracellular, transmembrane and intracellular domains of TCR. These changes occur in not only the antigen-recognizing region but also the TCRα AB loop, the TCRβ FG loop, the cholesterol-binding site in the transmembrane region, the TCRα transmembrane region, the transmembrane region of CD3ζζ, and the intracellular region of CD3ε [45–50]. These changes facilitate the phosphorylation process by allowing easier access for Lck to the CD3 ITAMs. Recently, the structure of TCR complexed with monomeric pMHC, lacking the intracellular CD3 regions, showed no obvious difference compared to mock TCR, except the CDRs [51,52]. However, recent investigation revealed closed and compacted conformations of TCR-CD3 complex in a more physiological lipid membrane, which may represent the true resting state, hypothesizing that structures of TCR-CD3 complex in detergent are approximately ligand-activated conformation even without ligand [25]. Further investigation is needed to confirm or refute this proposed model.

Mechano-sensing model

When recognizing pMHC, TCR also senses the mechanical forces, including the possibilities of pull force, shear force and tension force [53–56]. These forces aid in the formation of catch or slip bonds between TCR and pMHC, facilitating antigen discrimination by potentially disrupting CD3-lipid interactions to release ITAMs for phosphorylation [53–55].

TCR clustering model

Like other receptors, TCR has been shown to form dimers or oligomers after stimulation and subsequently generate an immunological synapse to promote triggering [57,58]. Although a recent study using single-molecule imaging argues that monomeric TCR drives antigen recognition and TCR clusters have enrichment of TCR monomers rather than oligomers, it is possible that TCR molecules form spatial clusters but remain structurally monomeric [59]. Indeed, a serial of DNA origami-based assays showed that the spatial control of antigen or receptor clustering regulates TCR and chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) activation, as the formation of TCR clusters enables serial engagement of multiple receptors by the same ligand, thus increasing the avidity of antigen stimulation [60–64]. Overall, TCR clustering may not directly affect initial triggering, but could amplify the initial signal to enhance antigen sensitivity.

Lck recruitment model

In addition to TCR, pMHC also interacts with Lck-bound CD4/8 coreceptors to increase the local concentration of substrates and kinases [57]. pMHC binds to TCR at a titled angel, and the coreceptors can only fit underneath of the pMHC complex in one direction to bring Lck into proximity [65]. TCRs with reverse docking topology on pMHC cannot trigger signaling even with high binding affinities [65]. Apart from coreceptors, Lck can also be recruited to the TCR through CD3ε. The BRS and RK motifs in CD3ε, which are bound to the membrane at the resting stage, can be released upon antigen engagement and recruit Lck through ionic interactions [30,66]. In mature T cells, free Lck is shown to be responsible for initial TCR triggering, while coreceptor-bound Lck is recruited later, possibly due to the higher mobility of free Lck [67,68]. Preventing coreceptor involvement reduces antigen sensitivity but does not completely abolish TCR signaling [69].

CD45 segregation model

The interaction between pMHC and TCR results in a close contact area between T cells and antigen-presenting cells. This tight contact prevents the CD45 phosphatase, which has a rigid and extended extracellular domain, from entering the interface due to steric hindrance. As a result, the dephosphorylation process is impaired [42,70]. As the primary TCR phosphatase, CD45 has multiple splicing variants expressed at different T cell stages. Even the shortest CD45 variant CD45RO has a dimension of approximately 21 nm, larger than that of the TCR-pMHC complex at approximately 14 nm. Indeed, CD45 segregation has been observed in TCR-enriched microvilli and lately formed immunological synapses [71,72]. Recent studies have shown that promoting CD45 segregation by controlling ligand positioning, height or slowing TCR diffusion can trigger T cells [73–75]. Interestingly, CD45 can be pre-excluded from TCR-enriched microvilli before antigen engagement, and this exclusion is dependent on the relatively short transmembrane region rather than the CD45 extracellular domain, indicating that size exclusion acts together with other mechanisms to determine protein partitioning [76]. However, the CD45 segregation model cannot fully explain the non-stimulatory feature of reverse docking antigen discussed above, suggesting that both Lck recruitment and CD45 segregation are necessary to trigger TCR phosphorylation.

DIVERSE SIGNAL OUTPUTS OF TCR

The TCR signal output is dependent on the intracellular domains of the CD3 chains, which exhibit functional diversity (Figure 1). CD3γ and CD3δ each mainly contain an ITAM and a di-Leucine motif. CD3ε contains a BRS, PRS, RK and ITAM motif, while CD3ζ contains three BRSs and three ITAMs.

As previously mentioned, the BRS motif mediates the interaction of the intracellular domain of CD3 with the inner leaflet of the plasma membrane, thereby keeping the ITAMs in an autoinhibitory state. Interestingly, when membrane binding is disrupted, the exposed CD3ε motifs, including the BRS, RK and PRS motifs, can synergistically interact with Lck to promote CD3 phosphorylation [30,66]. CD3ζ BRS can also interact with Lck with weaker affinity [30]. Additionally, CD3ε BRS can interact with the p85 subunit of PI3K to regulate the Akt signaling pathway, and CD3ε PRS can interact with Nck to regulate immune synapse maturation and T cell activation [49,77]. Differently, the di-Leucine motifs regulate the downmodulation or internalization of surface TCRs, and CD3 ubiquitination also regulates cycling and degradation [21,78–86]. The ubiquitination sites have been reported to be located in CD3δ, CD3ε, and CD3ζ, which regulate both the activation and the development of T lymphocytes [81–86].

There are ten ITAMs and six types of ITAMs in one TCR molecule, which could generate diverse phosphorylation combinations theoretically. It is known that strong and weak antigens elicit distinct T-cell responses, including cytokine production, proliferation and differentiation [87,88]. Mechanistically, strong antigens cause full phosphorylation of CD3ζ ITAMs, while weak antigens can only trigger partial phosphorylation at the same concentration [89]. Mouse models containing various ITAM mutations (from tyrosine to phenylalanine) have been constructed to study the quantitative and qualitative signaling of CD3 ITAMs. Cytokine production of T cells appears to require only a small number of phosphorylated ITAMs, whereas cell proliferation requires more [90,91]. It is worth mentioning that CAR-T cells carrying only CD3ζ ITAM1 are more likely to differentiate into the memory phenotype, while CAR-T cells carrying only CD3ζ ITAM3 maintain a more naive phenotype [92]. Moreover, compared with conventional CD3ζ CAR, CD3ε, γ or δ CAR can improve anti-tumor performance through various mechanisms involved in activation potential, metabolism and stimulation-induced T cell dysfunctionality [93]. These findings all demonstrate that the diverse CD3 ITAMs can provide both qualitative and quantitative signaling to determine T cell functions [22,94–96].

The phosphorylation levels of the two tyrosines within an ITAM are not necessarily synchronized, leading to dual- and mono-phosphorylated states of an ITAM. Recent results from absolute quantitative mass spectrometry reveal that in CD3ε ITAM, the phosphorylation level of the N-terminal tyrosine site is much higher than that of the C-terminal tyrosine. Unlike dual-phosphorylated CD3 ITAM, which recruits Zap70, mono-phosphorylated CD3ε ITAM recruits Csk to limit Lck activity and TCR phosphorylation [77]. Similarly, mono-phosphorylated CD3δ were found to recruit SHP-1 to restrain activation signals, thus preventing T cell exhaustion and dysfunction [93].

It is widely accepted that various extrinsic and intrinsic environmental factors, including cytokines, costimulatory molecules, antigen-presenting cells and antigen dosage, are closely related to the phosphorylation of ITAMs within the TCR complex. However, the specific mechanism by which phosphorylated ITAM diversity is generated and affects downstream-pathway selection remains largely unclear.

TCR AND CAR-T IMMUNOTHERAPY

Based on the knowledge of TCR signaling, scientists have developed strategies of CAR-T cell therapy that have achieved significant successes in treating hematological malignancies and are being expanded to treat solid tumors, autoimmune diseases, viral infections, and fibrosis [97–101]. To improve the clinical performance of CAR-T cells, multiple generations of CAR have been developed, and more are under development [102–108].

The CAR is a chimera of an antibody-derived extracellular domain for target recognition, a transmembrane domain and an intracellular signaling domain. The transmembrane domain, which usually mediates dimerization, plays a crucial role in CAR-T cell activation. In the first generation CAR, CD3ζ is directly linked to an extracellular antigen-recognizing domain and this construct tends to form homodimer or heterodimer with native TCR [104,109]. Later, the dimeric transmembrane domains of CD28 or CD8 were more widely used due to their higher expression stability than CD3ζ transmembrane domain [110,111]. Recently, de novo designed transmembrane domains proved that different oligomeric states, from monomers up to tetramers, are positively correlated with the anti-tumor capacity of CAR-T cells, indicating a novel strategy to improve CAR-T cell therapy [112]. CAR_Cys-T cells using a 4-1BB-derived hinge region containing 11 cysteines residues form a larger diameter of CAR clusters upon antigen stimulation and showed promoted antitumor activity, which highlights the importance of CAR clustering [113].

Lck recruitment is a crucial step of TCR activation, as well as CAR activation. The tyrosine kinase inhibitor Dasatinib can make CAR-T cells function-off by inhibiting Lck activity [114]. The CD28 intracellular domain in the second-generation CAR can directly recruit Lck besides initiating co-stimulatory signal [115–117]. In addition, the transmembrane region of CD28 mediates CAR heterodimerization with native CD28 to recruit Lck and this mechanism may also apply for the CAR carrying CD8 transmembrane region [112,117,118]. Interestingly, transmembrane domain of inducible costimulator (ICOS) was newly found to recruit Lck, and thus may be applied for engineering CARs with enhanced functions [119].

Besides Lck recruitment, CD45 segregation is also important. CAR-T activation can be precisely tuned by manipulating the size of the extracellular domain of CAR or CD45, suggesting a novel strategy to regulate CAR-T immune response [120].

Overall, only lessons from the chemical model of TCR triggering can be learned, due to the structural difference between CAR and TCR. In addition to the TCR triggering model, the diverse signal output mechanism of TCR can also inspire designing more effective CARs. In the crucial CD3ζ module, the number and position of ITAMs have been found to direct CAR-T cells to different effector or memory programs and yield distinct therapeutic profiles [92]. Besides engineering ITAM, mutating all lysine residues to inhibit ubiquitination markedly represses CAR downmodulation while enhancing the recycling of internalized CARs. Such recycling CAR shows more robust proliferation, better killing capacity and memory T cell differentiation, leading to superior persistence in vivo [121].

The diversity of the four CD3 chains ensures subtle regulation of TCR signaling, which is not present in CAR signaling. Although CD3ζ module is being used in most CAR designs, high throughput screening approaches have also revealed that CD3ε can enhance the anti-tumor capacity of CAR-T cells [122], and that FCRL6-CD3γ would increase killing rates of CAR-T cells [123]. A recent study showed that replacing the cytoplasmic domain of CD3ζ with that of other CD3 chains, especially CD3δ, would improve killing efficacy with lower expression of exhaustion markers and higher expression of memory and self-renewing markers [93]. Further, introducing the cytoplasmic domain of CD3ε into CD28 and CD3ζ based CAR reduced cytokine storm while improving CAR-T cell persistence and antitumor function. Similarly, in the 4-1BB and CD3ζ based CAR context, incorporation of CD3ε promoted CAR T cell function through Lck recruitment by the RK motif of CD3ε [66,77]. Interestingly, another study found that 4-1BB-based CAR containing the PRS and ITAM motif of CD3ε enhances in vivo antitumor function in settings of low antigen [124]. All these findings highlight that harnessing CD3 diversity can improve the performance of CAR-T cells.

To better mimic TCR signaling, the latest research has rebuilt CAR on native TCR-CD3 complex [125–131]. T cell antigen coupler (TAC) is composed of an antigen-recognizing domain, an anti-CD3 single chain antibody to co-opt native TCR, and a co-receptor domain; Antibody-TCR (AbTCR) combines a Fab-based antigen-recognizing domain with a γδTCR-signaling domain, avoiding the mispairing issues with traditional αβTCR; T cell receptor fusion constructs (TRuCs) offer an intact TCR complex by fusing antibody-based binding domain to TCR subunits; synthetic TCR and antigen receptor (STAR) or HLA-independent T cell receptors (HIT receptors) incorporate the antigen-recognizing domain of an antibody with the constant regions of TCR; TCR-like CAR (TCAR) designs involve arranging identical antigen-recognizing domain in tandem with the constant regions of TCR. These strategies have shown promise in inducing more efficient anti-tumor responses, such as higher antigen sensitivity, lower cytokine release, better proliferation, and less susceptibility to dysfunction. It is worth noting that these CARs abandon the co-stimulatory modules, and may therefore fit for different treatment scenarios. All the above studies have proved that the investigation of TCR activation mechanisms plays an essential role in guiding the design of CAR-T therapy.

TCR AND TCR-T IMMUNOTHERAPY

Different from CAR-T therapy, later developed TCR-T therapy has drawn more attention to the TCR antigen recognition mechanism, as the most significant challenge for TCR-T therapy is identifying individual-specific disease-associated TCR clones. Several algorithmic methods have been developed to group TCR clusters based on the sequence similarity of CDRs, particularly CDR3, and assist in predicting specific TCR clones. Some of these methods include grouping of lymphocyte interactions by paratope hotspots (GLIPH), TCRdist, antigen-specific lymphocyte identification by clustering of expanded sequences (ALICE), geometric isometry-based TCR alignment algorithm (GIANA), DeepTCR, pMHC-TCR binding prediction network (pMTnet) and others [132–141]. However, these methods do not incorporate the detailed structural mechanisms of antigen recognition mentioned above. With the breakthrough of cutting-edge deep neural network structure prediction methods like AlphaFold and RoseTTAFold, structure-based approaches represent a promising path for predicting TCR-pMHC interactions and identifying reactive TCR clones [142,143].

TCR-T therapy also references TCR triggering model. Due to the potential off-target toxicity of high-affinity TCRs in clinical trials, innovative therapeutic approaches are needed to maintain the effectiveness of TCRs in targeting tumors while minimizing their affinity for self-antigens [144]. The mechano-sensing model suggests that engineering the catch bond between TCR and pMHC can improve the sensitivity of TCR but reduce cross-reactions, making it a promising technology for TCR-T therapy [145].

The signal output mechanism is also applied to TCR-T therapy. TCR-T therapy has generally failed in clinical trials, due to defects such as limited expansion and short duration of transferred T cells. Co-transduction of artificial T cell adaptor molecule (ATAM) along with TCR into T cells has shown promise in enhancing the proliferation ability and persistence of TCR-T cells both in vitro and in vivo [146,147].

In general, CAR and TCR differ in terms of their structures, antigen recognition mechanisms, activation mechanisms, and clinical applications [22,148]. CAR-T therapies have demonstrated outstanding therapeutic effects on leukemia and lymphoma treatment, but have shown poor efficacy in solid tumor treatment. Although TCR-T therapy has shown better results in treating solid tumors in research studies, it also has challenges, such as TCR mismatch, non-specific cytotoxicity, and cytokine storm caused by immature technology [149]. Understanding the mechanism of TCR activation has inspired the development of strategies for more effective immunotherapies (Table 1).

Table 1

Application of antigen recognition, triggering and signal output mechanisms in immunotherapies

SUMMARY AND OUTLOOK

TCR signaling provides the primary signal for T cells, directing the immune response against pathogens and cancer cells. Systematic investigations of TCR activation mechanisms contribute to a thorough understanding of T-cell immunity. As mentioned above, TCRs have been found to employ diverse antigen recognition, triggering, and signal output mechanisms to effectively deal with various antigens (Figure 1). These mechanisms can be harnessed to develop more efficient TCR-T and CAR-T cell therapies against various diseases.

Funding

This work was supported by the National Key R&D Program of China (2023YFA0915701) to X.S. and the Chinese Academy of Sciences grant (YSBR-014) to C.X.

Author contributions

C.X. and X.S. conceived and designed the topics. L.Z. and X.S. wrote the manuscript. X.X. and C.X. revised it.

Conflict of interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References

Palm NW, Rosenstein RK, Medzhitov R. Allergic host defences. Nature 2012; 484: 465-472. [Article] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Shah K, Al-Haidari A, Sun J, et al. T cell receptor (TCR) signaling in health and disease. Sig Transduct Target Ther 2021; 6: 412. [Article] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
Attaf M, Huseby E, Sewell AK. αβ T cell receptors as predictors of health and disease. Cell Mol Immunol 2015; 12: 391-399. [Article] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Schamel WWA, Arechaga I, Risueño RM, et al. Coexistence of multivalent and monovalent TCRs explains high sensitivity and wide range of response. J Exp Med 2005; 202: 493-503. [Article] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Pielak RM, O’Donoghue GP, Lin JJ, et al. Early T cell receptor signals globally modulate ligand:receptor affinities during antigen discrimination. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 2017; 114: 12190-12195. [Article] [NASA ADS] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Sykulev Y, Joo M, Vturina I, et al. Evidence that a single peptide-MHC complex on a target cell can elicit a cytolytic T cell response. Immunity 1996; 4: 565-571. [Article] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
von Boehmer H, Kisielow P. Self-nonself discrimination by T cells. Science 1990; 248: 1369-1373. [Article] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Huang J, Brameshuber M, Zeng X, et al. A single peptide-major histocompatibility complex ligand triggers digital cytokine secretion in CD4+ T cells. Immunity 2013; 39: 846-857. [Article] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
Garcia KC, Degano M, Stanfield RL, et al. An αβ T cell receptor structure at 2.5 Å and its orientation in the TCR-MHC complex. Science 1996; 274: 209-219. [Article] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Hennecke J, Wiley DC. T cell receptor-MHC interactions up close. Cell 2001; 104: 1-4. [Article] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Arstila TP, Casrouge A, Baron V́, et al. A direct estimate of the human αβ T cell receptor diversity. Science 1999; 286: 958-961. [Article] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Chothia C, Boswell DR, Lesk AM. The outline structure of the T-cell alpha beta receptor. EMBO J 1988; 7: 3745-3755. [Article] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Aran A, Garrigós L, Curigliano G, et al. Evaluation of the TCR repertoire as a predictive and prognostic biomarker in cancer: Diversity or clonality?. Cancers 2022; 14: 1771. [Article] [Google Scholar]
Mora T, Walczak AM. Quantifying lymphocyte receptor diversity. In: Das J, Jayaprakash C, Eds. Systems Immunology. Boca Raton: CRC Press, 2018. 183–198 [Google Scholar]
Davis MM, Bjorkman PJ. T-cell antigen receptor genes and T-cell recognition. Nature 1988; 334: 395-402. [Article] [NASA ADS] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Bhati M, Cole DK, McCluskey J, et al. The versatility of the αβT-cell antigen receptor. Protein Sci 2014; 23: 260-272. [Article] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Krangel MS. Mechanics of T cell receptor gene rearrangement. Curr Opin Immunol 2009; 21: 133-139. [Article] [Google Scholar]
Samelson LE, Klausner RD. The T-cell antigen receptor. Ann New York Acad Sci 1988; 540: 1-3. [Article] [NASA ADS] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Xu X, Li H, Xu C. Structural understanding of T cell receptor triggering. Cell Mol Immunol 2020; 17: 193-202. [Article] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Reth M. Antigen receptor tail clue. Nature 1989; 338: 383-384. [Article] [NASA ADS] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Alcover A, Alarcón B, Di Bartolo V. Cell biology of T cell receptor expression and regulation. Annu Rev Immunol 2018; 36: 103-125. [Article] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Wang H, Song X, Shen L, et al. Exploiting T cell signaling to optimize engineered T cell therapies. Trends Cancer 2022; 8: 123-134. [Article] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Dong D, Zheng L, Lin J, et al. Structural basis of assembly of the human T cell receptor-CD3 complex. Nature 2019; 573: 546-552. [Article] [NASA ADS] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Chen Y, Zhu Y, Li X, et al. Cholesterol inhibits TCR signaling by directly restricting TCR-CD3 core tunnel motility. Mol Cell 2022; 82: 1278-1287. [Article] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Notti R Q, Yi F, Heissel S, et al. The resting state of the human T-cell receptor. bioRxiv: 2023.08.22.554360, 2023 [Google Scholar]
Aivazian D, Stern LJ. Phosphorylation of T cell receptor zeta is regulated by a lipid dependent folding transition. Nat Struct Biol 2000; 7: 1023-1026. [Article] [Google Scholar]
Xu C, Gagnon E, Call ME, et al. Regulation of T cell receptor activation by dynamic membrane binding of the CD3ɛ cytoplasmic tyrosine-based motif. Cell 2008; 135: 702-713. [Article] [Google Scholar]
DeFord-Watts LM, Dougall DS, Belkaya S, et al. The CD3ζ subunit contains a phosphoinositide-binding motif that is required for the stable accumulation of TCR-CD3 complex at the immunological synapse. J Immunol 2011; 186: 6839-6847. [Article] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Shi X, Bi Y, Yang W, et al. Ca²⁺ regulates T-cell receptor activation by modulating the charge property of lipids. Nature 2013; 493: 111-115. [Article] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Li L, Guo X, Shi X, et al. Ionic CD3-Lck interaction regulates the initiation of T-cell receptor signaling. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 2017; 114: E5891-E5899. [Article] [Google Scholar]
Wu H, Cao R, Wei S, et al. Cholesterol binds in a reversed orientation to TCRβ-TM in which its oh group is localized to the center of the lipid bilayer. J Mol Biol 2021; 433: 167328. [Article] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Yang W, Bai Y, Xiong Y, et al. Potentiating the antitumour response of CD8⁺ T cells by modulating cholesterol metabolism. Nature 2016; 531: 651-655. [Article] [NASA ADS] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Molnár E, Swamy M, Holzer M, et al. Cholesterol and sphingomyelin drive ligand-independent t-cell antigen receptor nanoclustering. J Biol Chem 2012; 287: 42664-42674. [Article] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Swamy M, Beck-Garcia K, Beck-Garcia E, et al. A cholesterol-based allostery model of T cell receptor phosphorylation. Immunity 2016; 44: 1091-1101. [Article] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Schamel WWA, Alarcon B, Höfer T, et al. The allostery model of TCR regulation. J Immunol 2017; 198: 47-52. [Article] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Yin Y, Mariuzza RA. The multiple mechanisms of T cell receptor cross-reactivity. Immunity 2009; 31: 849-851. [Article] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Barbosa CRR, Barton J, Shepherd AJ, et al. Mechanistic diversity in MHC class I antigen recognition. Biochem J 2021; 478: 4187-4202. [Article] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
La Gruta NL, Gras S, Daley SR, et al. Understanding the drivers of MHC restriction of T cell receptors. Nat Rev Immunol 2018; 18: 467-478. [Article] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Rossjohn J, Gras S, Miles JJ, et al. T cell antigen receptor recognition of antigen-presenting molecules. Annu Rev Immunol 2015; 33: 169-200. [Article] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Gil A, Kenney LL, Mishra R, et al. Vaccination and heterologous immunity: Educating the immune system. Trans R Soc Tropical Med Hyg 2015; 109: 62-69. [Article] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Palacios EH, Weiss A. Function of the Src-family kinases, Lck and Fyn, in T-cell development and activation. Oncogene 2004; 23: 7990-8000. [Article] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Chang VT, Fernandes RA, Ganzinger KA, et al. Initiation of T cell signaling by CD45 segregation at “close contacts”. Nat Immunol 2016; 17: 574-582. [Article] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Ben Mkaddem S, Benhamou M, Monteiro RC. Understanding Fc receptor involvement in inflammatory diseases: From mechanisms to new therapeutic tools. Front Immunol 2019; 10: 811. [Article] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Okazaki T, Maeda A, Nishimura H, et al. PD-1 immunoreceptor inhibits B cell receptor-mediated signaling by recruiting SRC homology 2-domain-containing tyrosine phosphatase 2 to phosphotyrosine. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 2001; 98: 13866-13871. [Article] [NASA ADS] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Beddoe T, Chen Z, Clements CS, et al. Antigen ligation triggers a conformational change within the constant domain of the αβ T cell receptor. Immunity 2009; 30: 777-788. [Article] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Rangarajan S, He Y, Chen Y, et al. Peptide-MHC (pMHC) binding to a human antiviral T cell receptor induces long-range allosteric communication between pMHC- and CD3-binding sites. J Biol Chem 2018; 293: 15991-16005. [Article] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Brazin KN, Mallis RJ, Boeszoermenyi A, et al. The T cell antigen receptor α transmembrane domain coordinates triggering through regulation of bilayer immersion and CD3 subunit associations. Immunity 2018; 49: 829-841.e6. [Article] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Lee MS, Glassman CR, Deshpande NR, et al. A mechanical switch couples T cell receptor triggering to the cytoplasmic juxtamembrane regions of CD3ζζ. Immunity 2015; 43: 227-239. [Article] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Gil D, Schamel WWA, Montoya M, et al. Recruitment of Nck by CD3ε reveals a ligand-induced conformational change essential for T cell receptor signaling and synapse formation. Cell 2002; 109: 901-912. [Article] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Guo X, Yan C, Li H, et al. Lipid-dependent conformational dynamics underlie the functional versatility of T-cell receptor. Cell Res 2017; 27: 505-525. [Article] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Sušac L, Vuong MT, Thomas C, et al. Structure of a fully assembled tumor-specific T cell receptor ligated by pMHC. Cell 2022; 185: 3201-3213. [Article] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Saotome K, Dudgeon D, Colotti K, et al. Structural analysis of cancer-relevant TCR-CD3 and peptide-MHC complexes by cryoEM. Nat Commun 2023; 14: 2401. [Article] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Brazin KN, Mallis RJ, Das DK, et al. Structural features of the αβTCR mechanotransduction apparatus that promote pmhc discrimination. Front Immunol 2015; 6: 441. [Article] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Liu B, Chen W, Evavold BD, et al. Accumulation of dynamic catch bonds between TCR and agonist peptide-MHC triggers T cell signaling. Cell 2014; 157: 357-368. [Article] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Sibener LV, Fernandes RA, Kolawole EM, et al. Isolation of a structural mechanism for uncoupling T cell receptor signaling from peptide-MHC binding. Cell 2018; 174: 672-687. [Article] [NASA ADS] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Li YC, Chen BM, Wu PC, et al. Cutting edge: Mechanical forces acting on T cells immobilized via the TCR complex can trigger TCR signaling. J Immunol 2010; 184: 5959-5963. [Article] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Krogsgaard M, Li Q, Sumen C, et al. Agonist/endogenous peptide-MHC heterodimers drive T cell activation and sensitivity. Nature 2005; 434: 238-243. [Article] [NASA ADS] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Campi G, Varma R, Dustin ML. Actin and agonist MHC-peptide complex-dependent T cell receptor microclusters as scaffolds for signaling. J Exp Med 2005; 202: 1031-1036. [Article] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Brameshuber M, Kellner F, Rossboth BK, et al. Monomeric TCRs drive T cell antigen recognition. Nat Immunol 2018; 19: 487-496. [Article] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Hellmeier J, Platzer R, Eklund AS, et al. DNA origami demonstrate the unique stimulatory power of single pMHCs as T cell antigens. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 2021; 118: e2016857118. [Article] [NASA ADS] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Dong R, Aksel T, Chan W, et al. DNA origami patterning of synthetic T cell receptors reveals spatial control of the sensitivity and kinetics of signal activation. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 2021; 118: e2109057118. [Article] [NASA ADS] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Taylor MJ, Husain K, Gartner ZJ, et al. A DNA-based T cell receptor reveals a role for receptor clustering in ligand discrimination. Cell 2017; 169: 108-119. [Article] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
van der Merwe PA, Dushek O. Mechanisms for T cell receptor triggering. Nat Rev Immunol 2011; 11: 47-55. [Article] [Google Scholar]
Courtney AH, Lo WL, Weiss A. TCR signaling: Mechanisms of initiation and propagation. Trends Biochem Sci 2018; 43: 108-123. [Article] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Zareie P, Szeto C, Farenc C, et al. Canonical T cell receptor docking on peptide-MHC is essential for T cell signaling. Science 2021; 372: eabe9124. [Article] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Hartl FA, Beck-Garcìa E, Woessner NM, et al. Noncanonical binding of Lck to CD3ε promotes TCR signaling and CAR function. Nat Immunol 2020; 21: 902-913. [Article] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Casas J, Brzostek J, Zarnitsyna VI, et al. Ligand-engaged TCR is triggered by Lck not associated with CD8 coreceptor. Nat Commun 2014; 5: 5624. [Article] [NASA ADS] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Wei Q, Brzostek J, Sankaran S, et al. Lck bound to coreceptor is less active than free Lck. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 2020; 117: 15809-15817. [Article] [NASA ADS] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Irvine DJ, Purbhoo MA, Krogsgaard M, et al. Direct observation of ligand recognition by T cells. Nature 2002; 419: 845-849. [Article] [NASA ADS] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
James JR, Vale RD. Biophysical mechanism of T-cell receptor triggering in a reconstituted system. Nature 2012; 487: 64-69. [Article] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Choudhuri K, Wiseman D, Brown MH, et al. T-cell receptor triggering is critically dependent on the dimensions of its peptide-MHC ligand. Nature 2005; 436: 578-582. [Article] [NASA ADS] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Razvag Y, Neve-Oz Y, Sajman J, et al. Nanoscale kinetic segregation of TCR and CD45 in engaged microvilli facilitates early T cell activation. Nat Commun 2018; 9: 732. [Article] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Wilhelm KB, Morita S, McAffee DB, et al. Height, but not binding epitope, affects the potency of synthetic TCR agonists. Biophys J 2021; 120: 5136-5137. [Article] [NASA ADS] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Chen KY, Jenkins E, Körbel M, et al. Trapping or slowing the diffusion of T cell receptors at close contacts initiates T cell signaling. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 2021; 118: e2024250118. [Article] [NASA ADS] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Cai H, Muller J, Depoil D, et al. Full control of ligand positioning reveals spatial thresholds for T cell receptor triggering. Nat Nanotech 2018; 13: 610-617. [Article] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Jung Y, Wen L, Altman A, et al. CD45 pre-exclusion from the tips of T cell microvilli prior to antigen recognition. Nat Commun 2021; 12: 3872. [Article] [NASA ADS] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Wu W, Zhou Q, Masubuchi T, et al. Multiple signaling roles of CD3ε and its application in CAR-T cell therapy. Cell 2020; 182: 855-871.e23. [Article] [Google Scholar]
Dietrich J, Kastrup J, Nielsen BL, et al. Regulation and function of the CD3γ DxxxLL motif: A binding site for adaptor protein-1 and adaptor protein-2 in vitro. J Cell Biol 1997; 138: 271-281. [Article] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Letourneur F, Klausner RD. A novel di-leucine motif and a tyrosine-based motif independently mediate lysosomal targeting and endocytosis of CD3 chains. Cell 1992; 69: 1143-1157. [Article] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Dietrich J, Hou X, Wegener AM, et al. CD3 gamma contains a phosphoserine-dependent di-leucine motif involved in down-regulation of the T cell receptor.. EMBO J 1994; 13: 2156-2166. [Article] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Wang H, Holst J, Woo SR, et al. Tonic ubiquitylation controls T-cell receptor:CD3 complex expression during T-cell development. EMBO J 2010; 29: 1285-1298. [Article] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Locke M, Toth JI, Petroski MD. Lys11- and Lys48-linked ubiquitin chains interact with p97 during endoplasmic-reticulum-associated degradation. Biochem J 2014; 459: 205-216. [Article] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Nurieva RI, Zheng S, Jin W, et al. The E3 ubiquitin ligase grail regulates T cell tolerance and regulatory T cell function by mediating t cell receptor-CD3 degradation. Immunity 2010; 32: 670-680. [Article] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Wang HY, Altman Y, Fang D, et al. Cbl promotes ubiquitination of the T cell receptor ζ through an adaptor function of Zap-70. J Biol Chem 2001; 276: 26004-26011. [Article] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Huang H, Jeon M, Liao L, et al. K33-linked polyubiquitination of t cell receptor-ζ regulates proteolysis-independent T cell signaling. Immunity 2010; 33: 60-70. [Article] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Cenciarelli C, Hou D, Hsu KC, et al. Activation-induced ubiquitination of the T cell antigen receptor. Science 1992; 257: 795-797. [Article] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Tubo NJ, Pagán AJ, Taylor JJ, et al. Single naive CD4⁺ T cells from a diverse repertoire produce different effector cell types during infection. Cell 2013; 153: 785-796. [Article] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Snook JP, Kim C, Williams MA. TCR signal strength controls the differentiation of CD4⁺ effector and memory T cells. Sci Immunol 2018; 3: eaas9103. [Article] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Kersh EN, Shaw AS, Allen PM. Fidelity of T cell activation through multistep T cell receptor ζ phosphorylation. Science 1998; 281: 572-575. [Article] [NASA ADS] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Holst J, Wang H, Eder KD, et al. Scalable signaling mediated by T cell antigen receptor-CD3 ITAMs ensures effective negative selection and prevents autoimmunity. Nat Immunol 2008; 9: 658-666. [Article] [Google Scholar]
Guy CS, Vignali KM, Temirov J, et al. Distinct TCR signaling pathways drive proliferation and cytokine production in T cells. Nat Immunol 2013; 14: 262-270. [Article] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Feucht J, Sun J, Eyquem J, et al. Calibration of CAR activation potential directs alternative T cell fates and therapeutic potency. Nat Med 2019; 25: 82-88. [Article] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Velasco Cárdenas RMH, Brandl SM, Meléndez AV, et al. Harnessing CD3 diversity to optimize car T cells. Nat Immunol 2023; 24: 2135-2149. [Article] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Mukhopadhyay H, de Wet B, Clemens L, et al. Multisite phosphorylation modulates the T cell receptor ζ-chain potency but not the switchlike response. Biophys J 2016; 110: 1896-1906. [Article] [Google Scholar]
James JR. Tuning ITAM multiplicity on T cell receptors can control potency and selectivity to ligand density. Sci Signal 2018; 11: eaan1088. [Article] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Gaud G, Achar S, Bourassa FXP, et al. CD3ζ ITAMs enable ligand discrimination and antagonism by inhibiting TCR signaling in response to low-affinity peptides. Nat Immunol 2023; 24: 2121-2134. [Article] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Grupp SA, Kalos M, Barrett D, et al. Chimeric antigen receptor-modified t cells for acute lymphoid leukemia. N Engl J Med 2013; 368: 1509-1518. [Article] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Wang M, Munoz J, Goy A, et al. KTE-X19 car T-cell therapy in relapsed or refractory mantle-cell lymphoma. N Engl J Med 2020; 382: 1331-1342. [Article] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Hale M, Mesojednik T, Romano Ibarra GS, et al. Engineering HIV-resistant, anti-HIV chimeric antigen receptor T cells. Mol Ther 2017; 25: 570-579. [Article] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Aghajanian H, Kimura T, Rurik JG, et al. Targeting cardiac fibrosis with engineered T cells. Nature 2019; 573: 430-433. [Article] [NASA ADS] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Wei J, Guo Y, Wang Y, et al. Clinical development of CAR T cell therapy in China: 2020 update. Cell Mol Immunol 2021; 18: 792-804. [Article] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Abrantes R, Duarte HO, Gomes C, et al. CAR-Ts: New perspectives in cancer therapy. FEBS Lett 2022; 596: 403-416. [Article] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Chmielewski M, Abken H. TRUCKS, the fourth-generation CAR T cells: Current developments and clinical translation. Adv Cell Gene Ther 2020; 3: e84. [Article] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
Eshhar Z, Waks T, Gross G, et al. Specific activation and targeting of cytotoxic lymphocytes through chimeric single chains consisting of antibody-binding domains and the gamma or zeta subunits of the immunoglobulin and T-cell receptors. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 1993; 90: 720-724. [Article] [NASA ADS] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Guedan S, Posey AD Jr., Shaw C, et al. Enhancing CAR T cell persistence through ICOS and 4-1BB costimulation. JCI Insight 2018; 3: e96976. [Article] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Krause A, Guo HF, Latouche JB, et al. Antigen-dependent Cd28 signaling selectively enhances survival and proliferation in genetically modified activated human primary T lymphocytes. J Exp Med 1998; 188: 619-626. [Article] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Lin WY, Wang HH, Chen YW, et al. Gene modified CAR-T cellular therapy for hematologic malignancies. Int J Mol Sci 2020; 21: 8655. [Article] [Google Scholar]
Tokarew N, Ogonek J, Endres S, et al. Teaching an old dog new tricks: Next-generation CAR T cells. Br J Cancer 2019; 120: 26-37. [Article] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Bridgeman JS, Hawkins RE, Bagley S, et al. The optimal antigen response of chimeric antigen receptors harboring the CD3ζ transmembrane domain is dependent upon incorporation of the receptor into the endogenous TCR/CD3 complex. J Immunol 2010; 184: 6938-6949. [Article] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Inoo K, Inagaki R, Fujiwara K, et al. Immunological quality and performance of tumor vessel-targeting CAR-T cells prepared by mRNA-EP for clinical research. Mol Ther-Oncolytics 2016; 3: 16024. [Article] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
Fujiwara K, Tsunei A, Kusabuka H, et al. Hinge and transmembrane domains of chimeric antigen receptor regulate receptor expression and signaling threshold. Cells 2020; 9: 1182. [Article] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Elazar A, Chandler NJ, Davey AS, et al. De novo-designed transmembrane domains tune engineered receptor functions. eLife 2022; 11: e75660. [Article] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Wang Y, Gao Y, Niu C, et al. Chimeric antigen receptor clustering via cysteines enhances T-cell efficacy against tumor. Cancer Immunol Immunother 2022; 71: 2801-2814. [Article] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Mestermann K, Giavridis T, Weber J, et al. The tyrosine kinase inhibitor dasatinib acts as a pharmacologic on/off switch for CAR T cells. Sci Transl Med 2019; 11: eaau5907. [Article] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Salter AI, Ivey RG, Kennedy JJ, et al. Phosphoproteomic analysis of chimeric antigen receptor signaling reveals kinetic and quantitative differences that affect cell function. Sci Signal 2018; 11: eaat6753. [Article] [Google Scholar]
Rohrs JA, Zheng D, Graham NA, et al. Computational model of chimeric antigen receptors explains site-specific phosphorylation kinetics. Biophys J 2018; 115: 1116-1129. [Article] [NASA ADS] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Sun C, Shou P, Du H, et al. THEMIS-SHP1 recruitment by 4-1BB tunes LCK-mediated priming of chimeric antigen receptor-redirected T cells. Cancer Cell 2020; 37: 216-225. [Article] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Muller YD, Nguyen DP, Ferreira LMR, et al. The CD28-transmembrane domain mediates chimeric antigen receptor heterodimerization with CD28. Front Immunol 2021; 12: 639818. [Article] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Wan Z, Shao X, Ji X, et al. Transmembrane domain-mediated Lck association underlies bystander and costimulatory ICOS signaling. Cell Mol Immunol 2020; 17: 143-152. [Article] [Google Scholar]
Xiao Q, Zhang X, Tu L, et al. Size-dependent activation of CAR-T cells. Sci Immunol 2022; 7: eabl3995. [Article] [Google Scholar]
Li W, Qiu S, Chen J, et al. Chimeric antigen receptor designed to prevent ubiquitination and downregulation showed durable antitumor efficacy. Immunity 2020; 53: 456-470. [Article] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Gordon KS, Kyung T, Perez CR, et al. Screening for CD19-specific chimaeric antigen receptors with enhanced signalling via a barcoded library of intracellular domains. Nat Biomed Eng 2022; 6: 855-866. [Article] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Castellanos-Rueda R, Di Roberto RB, Bieberich F, et al. speedingCARs: Accelerating the engineering of CAR T cells by signaling domain shuffling and single-cell sequencing. Nat Commun 2022; 13: 6555. [Article] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Salter AI, Rajan A, Kennedy JJ, et al. Comparative analysis of TCR and CAR signaling informs CAR designs with superior antigen sensitivity and in vivo function. Sci Signal 2021; 14: eabe2606. [Article] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Liu Y, Liu G, Wang J, et al. Chimeric STAR receptors using TCR machinery mediate robust responses against solid tumors. Sci Transl Med 2021; 13: eabb5191. [Article] [Google Scholar]
Wang J, Zhang X, Zhou Z, et al. A novel adoptive syntheticTCR and antigen receptor (STAR)T-cell therapy for B-cell acute lymphoblastic leukemia. Am J Hematol 2022; 97: 992-1004. [Article] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Mansilla-Soto J, Eyquem J, Haubner S, et al. HLA-independent T cell receptors for targeting tumors with low antigen density. Nat Med 2022; 28: 345-352. [Article] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Helsen CW, Hammill JA, Lau VWC, et al. The chimeric TAC receptor co-opts the T cell receptor yielding robust anti-tumor activity without toxicity. Nat Commun 2018; 9: 3049. [Article] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Birtel M, Voss RH, Reinhard K, et al. A TCR-like car promotes sensitive antigen recognition and controlled T-cell expansion upon MRNA vaccination. Cancer Res Commun 2022; 2: 827-841. [Article] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Baeuerle PA, Ding J, Patel E, et al. Synthetic TRuC receptors engaging the complete T cell receptor for potent anti-tumor response. Nat Commun 2019; 10: 2087. [Article] [NASA ADS] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Xu Y, Yang Z, Horan LH, et al. A novel antibody-TCR (AbTCR) platform combines Fab-based antigen recognition with gamma/delta-TCR signaling to facilitate T-cell cytotoxicity with low cytokine release. Cell Discov 2018; 4: 62. [Article] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Glanville J, Huang H, Nau A, et al. Identifying specificity groups in the T cell receptor repertoire. Nature 2017; 547: 94-98. [Article] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Dash P, Fiore-Gartland AJ, Hertz T, et al. Quantifiable predictive features define epitope-specific T cell receptor repertoires. Nature 2017; 547: 89-93. [Article] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Pogorelyy MV, Minervinaet AA, Shugay M, et al. Detecting T cell receptors involved in immune responses from single repertoire snapshots. PLoS Biol 2019; 17: e3000314 [Google Scholar]
Zhang H, Zhan X, Li B. GIANA allows computationally-efficient TCR clustering and multi-disease repertoire classification by isometric transformation. Nat Commun 2021; 12: 4699. [Article] [NASA ADS] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Huang H, Wang C, Rubelt F, et al. Analyzing the Mycobacterium tuberculosis immune response by T-cell receptor clustering with GLIPH2 and genome-wide antigen screening. Nat Biotechnol 2020; 38: 1194-1202. [Article] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Mayer-Blackwell K, Fiore-Gartland A, Thomas PG. Flexible distance-based TCR analysis in python with tcrdist3. Methods Mol Biol 2022; 2574: 309–366 [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Davidsen K, Olson BJ, DeWitt Iii WS, et al. Deep generative models for T cell receptor protein sequences. eLife 2019; 8: e46935. [Article] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Lu T, Zhang Z, Zhu J, et al. Deep learning-based prediction of the T cell receptor-antigen binding specificity. Nat Mach Intell 2021; 3: 864-875. [Article] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Sidhom JW, Larman HB, Pardoll DM, et al. DeepTCR is a deep learning framework for revealing sequence concepts within T-cell repertoires. Nat Commun 2021; 12: 1605. [Article] [NASA ADS] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Katayama Y, Yokota R, Akiyama T, et al. Machine learning approaches to TCR repertoire analysis. Front Immunol 2022; 13: 858057. [Article] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Borrman T, Pierce B, Vreven T, et al. High-throughput modeling and scoring of TCR-pMHC complexes to predict cross-reactive peptides. Bioinformatics 2020; 36: 5377–5385 [Google Scholar]
Bradley P. Structure-based prediction of T cell receptor:peptide-MHC interactions. eLife 2023; 12: e82813. [Article] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Cameron BJ, Gerry AB, Dukes J, et al. Identification of a Titin-derived HLA-A1-presented peptide as a cross-reactive target for engineered MAGE A3-directed T cells. Sci Transl Med 2013; 5: 197ra103. [Article] [Google Scholar]
Zhao X, Kolawole EM, Chan W, et al. Tuning T cell receptor sensitivity through catch bond engineering. Science 2022; 376: eabl5282. [Article] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Miyao K, Terakura S, Okuno S, et al. Introduction of genetically modified CD3ζ improves proliferation and persistence of antigen-specific CTLs. Cancer Immunol Res 2018; 6: 733-744. [Article] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Sakai T, Terakura S, Miyao K, et al. Artificial T cell adaptor molecule-transduced TCR-T cells demonstrated improved proliferation only when transduced in a higher intensity. Mol Ther-Oncolytics 2020; 18: 613-622. [Article] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
Norberg SM, Hinrichs CS. Engineered T cell therapy for viral and non-viral epithelial cancers. Cancer Cell 2023; 41: 58-69. [Article] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Zhang Y, Liu Z, Wei W, et al. TCR engineered T cells for solid tumor immunotherapy. Exp Hematol Oncol 2022; 11: 38. [Article] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

All Tables

Table 1

Application of antigen recognition, triggering and signal output mechanisms in immunotherapies

In the text

All Figures

	Figure 1 Structure, antigen recognition, triggering and signal output mechanisms of TCR-CD3 complex.
In the text

Current usage metrics show cumulative count of Article Views (full-text article views including HTML views, PDF and ePub downloads, according to the available data) and Abstracts Views on Vision4Press platform.

Data correspond to usage on the plateform after 2015. The current usage metrics is available 48-96 hours after online publication and is updated daily on week days.

Initial download of the metrics may take a while.