Abstract
Superantigens are unconventional antigens which recognise immune receptors outside their usual recognition sites e.g. complementary determining regions (CDRs), to elicit a response within the target cell. T-cell superantigens crosslink T-cell receptors and MHC Class II molecules on antigen-presenting cells, leading to lymphocyte recruitment, induction of cytokine storms and T-cell anergy or apoptosis among many other effects. B-cell superantigens, on the other hand, bind immunoglobulins on B-cells, affecting opsonisation, IgG-mediated phagocytosis, and driving apoptosis. Here, through a review of the structural basis for recognition of immune receptors by superantigens, we show that their binding interfaces share specific physicochemical characteristics when compared with other protein-protein interaction complexes. Given that antibody-binding superantigens have been exploited extensively in industrial antibody purification, these observations could facilitate further protein engineering to optimize the use of superantigens in this and other areas of biotechnology.
Introduction
Superantigens are unconventional antigens in the sense that they elicit a response by binding outside the complementary determining regions (CDRs) of their target immune receptor macromolecules (antibodies or T-cell receptors). At their initial description in 1989, superantigens were originally defined as proteins that hyper-stimulate T-cells via the crosslinking of T-cell receptors (TCRs) and MHC Class II molecules (, ). This definition required extension following the discovery of B-cell superantigens. B-cell superantigens can hyper-stimulate a large population of B-cells without necessarily having the ability to crosslink TCRs with MHC Class II receptors; they therefore have a different mechanism and specificity compared to T-cell superantigens (). B-cell superantigens are commonly known to (i) stimulate a high proportion of B-cells, and (ii) bind outside of the CDRs (). An extended definition of the term ‘superantigen’ was suggested to incorporate both functions, as a molecule which has antigen-receptor mediated interactions with over 5% of the lymphocyte pool (). This functional definition is therefore based on the hyper-activity of the target receptor upon exposure, and we will use the term in this context here.
Here we review the current understanding of superantigens, how they directly interact with immune receptors of T and B-cells, what common features may be identified in recognition interfaces and how such insights could be adapted to facilitate further protein engineering of these versatile macromolecules for therapeutic, diagnostic, and biotechnological applications.
T-Cell Superantigens
T-cell superantigens are typically microbial proteins. They were first identified from observation of the hyper-stimulation of T-cells by Staphylococcal Enterotoxin B (SEB). This phenomenon was caused by the crosslinking of T-cell receptors (TCRs) Vβ with MHC class II α1 on antigen presenting cells (APC) by SEB (, ). By crosslinking MHC Class II to TCR, small amounts of superantigens can stimulate extensive T-cell proliferation. In a normal adaptive immune response, only around 0.0001% of T-cells are activated. In contrast, superantigen exposure can activate up to 30% of the T-cell pool, leading to severe pathologies following infection (, ).
Enterotoxins produced by Staphylococcus aureus and Streptococcus pyogenes form a common family of T-cell superantigens. These enterotoxins are small (20-28 kDa), two domain proteins which are diverse in sequence (15-90%) (). Despite this variation, enterotoxins and enterotoxin-like proteins from both Staphylococcus aureus and Streptococcus pyogenes are structurally similar (Figure 1), possessing a conserved Greek key motif at the N-terminus known as an oligonucleotide (OB)-fold (). The C-terminus consists of a conserved β-domain capped by an α-helix () with the two β-folds separated by a cluster of α-helices. Due to their structural similarity, it has been suggested by others that the enterotoxins from Staphylococcus aureus and Streptococcus pyogenes shared a common ancestor ().
Figure 1
Enterotoxins are thermostable, can withstand extreme pH and are resistant to degradation by proteolytic enzymes such as pepsin and trypsin (, ). Some can retain activity after the cooking and digestive process to cause food poisoning (): nearly 25% of food poisoning cases in the USA are attributed to Staphylococcal enterotoxins (). In addition, T-cell superantigens also contribute to the development of systemic inflammatory response syndrome (SIRS) known as sepsis (), toxic shock syndrome (, ), scarlet fever () and atopic dermatitis ().
Cellular Responses to T-Cell Superantigens
Observations of the cellular responses of T-cells to superantigens are inconsistent, depending on the type and maturity of the T-cell populations studied. T-cell superantigens can cause immature CD4+ and CD8+ T-cells to become depleted. Mature CD4+ and CD8+ T-cells on the other hand, proliferate and produce a cytokine storm (–25) driving mature T-cells into a state of anergy (26). TCR activation upregulates Fyn signalling, preventing the protein tyrosine kinase ZAP-70 from associating with TCRs via CD3, thus inhibiting TCR signalling (27). The depletion of immature T-cells and anergy of mature T-cells would potentially allow a pathogen to evade the innate immune response, increasing pathogen survivability.
TCR binding to the MHC class II receptors on APCs results in a variety of responses that is dependent on the APC type; the principal pathways and components are summarized in Figure 2. During infection, neutrophils are recruited along with other effector cells through the release of cytokines (e.g. IFN-γ, IL-17, IL-12) and CXC chemokines produced primarily by CD4+ T-cells (28, 50–52). Counterintuitively, the recruitment of leukocytes increases the survivability of Staphylococcus aureus, due to the hyper-stimulation of T-cells, eventually leading to T-cell anergy and cell death. S. aureus is known to survive within neutrophils and macrophages in abscesses (29, 30).
Figure 2
Alongside TCR/MHC Class II activation, signalling pathways are co-stimulated by crosslinking CD28 on the T-cell with CD80/B7-2 on APCs (53–56). T-cell superantigens can also crosslink the α-subunit of laminin, LAMA2, with G-protein coupled receptor (GPCR), resulting in T-cell stimulation (57–59) (Figure 2).
MHC Class II Binding
T-cell superantigens first bind to MHC Class II receptors and accumulate on the surface of the APC before binding to the TCR (). There are two possible binding sites on MHC Class II: a Zn-dependent high affinity site (Kd = 10-7 - 10-8 M) located on MHC Class II β chain, and a low affinity site (Kd = ~10-5 M) located on MHC Class II α chain (60). Most superantigens bind via the Zn-dependent binding site, forming a complex which is stable for more than 40 hours (61). The high affinity interface between SEH and MHC Class II α chain is shown in Figure 3A, showing a hydrophobic pocket surrounded by polar residues. In addition to H-bonds and salt bridges, a Zn ion contributes to the high binding affinity by stabilizing the complex through crosslinking H81 on the MHC Class II β-strand and H206, N208 on the β-strand 12 on SEH (62). This stabilization allows for the formation of 4 extra H-bonds due to the proximity of the chains where the removal of the Zn ion results in a decrease in binding for SEA, SED, SEE and SEH (63).
Figure 3
The low affinity binding site is exemplified by a structure containing the enterotoxin SEB, which forms a complex with MHC class II (61): the low affinity interface is shown in Figure 3B. In addition to cross-interface bonds, there is a hydrophobic patch on SEB comprised of F44, L45 and F47 which inserts into a hydrophobic pocket on MHC Class II α chain.
The enterotoxin SEA can also bind to the low and high affinity sites to crosslink two MHC Class II molecules (61, 64, 65). Staphylococcal Enterotoxin H (SEH) was shown to bind the Zn-dependent high affinity site on MHC class II (62), as well as to TCR Vα instead of Vβ (66, 67). A list of T-cell superantigens and their site specificities has been previously summarized by Proft and Fraser (). T-cell superantigen selectivity for the α or β chains of the MHC Class II complex is dependent on the presence of the Zn atom at the C-terminal β domain. Its absence leads to the binding of the α-chain of MHC Class II via a hydrophobic ridge on the N-terminal OB-domain ().
T-Cell Receptor Binding
Superantigens bind to the TCR after adhesion to MHC Class II; there are also two sites on the TCRs in all superantigen complexes studied to date. Some T-cell superantigens bind to the α chain [SEH (68)], although most recognize the β chain. Unlike complexes with MHC Class II, both TCR interfaces bind T-cell superantigens at low affinity (Kd = 10-4 – 10-6 M) (68, 69) and yet both are capable of mediating activation of a cytokine storm (, 70–73). SEB binding to the TCR β chain is shown in Figure 4A where the interface is located at the TCR binding cleft between the N-terminal β-barrel and the second α-helix. It is characterised by several cross-interface bonds, with N23 playing a crucial role, and a nearby hydrophobic patch formed of V26, Y79 and Y80 on SEH packing against the CDR2 loop of TCR Vβ (74).
Figure 4
SEH binding to the TCR α chain forms an interface comprising hydrophobic and hydrophilic patches, with a notable hydrophilic patch surrounding a Na ion (Figure 4B). Comparing this to the SEB-TCR β chain interface, there are 7 fewer H-bonds and 2 fewer salt bridges, although the binding affinities are similar (Kd = 10-4 – 10-6 M) (68). The lack of contacts between SEH and the TCR α chain may be bolstered by the presence of the Na ion. N16 found on the second α-helix and the hydrophobic patch (Y79 and Y80) on SEH are well conserved among T-cell superantigens whether they bind to the TCR α or β chains (67). The mutation N23A (equivalent to N16 in SEH) in SEC2 caused the loss of mitogenic activity (75) and the same mutation in SEB resulted in poorer proliferation of T-cells (76).
Binding of B-Cell Superantigens
B-cell superantigens bind immunoglobulins outside the CDRs; proteins which would fit this definition of a superantigen were first described in the early 1990s (). Binding to the Fab fragment drives B-cells into apoptosis by hyper-activation of B-cell receptors (BCRs). Considering that 20 to 50% of B-cells have BCRs on their surfaces (77), B-cell superantigens can elicit a potent immune response. However, B-cell superantigens are better known for their ability to bind Fc and their applications as affinity resins for antibody purification.
Staphylococcal Protein A (SpA), Streptococcal Protein G (SpG) and Peptostreptococcal Protein L (PpL) are B-cell superantigens located on the bacterial cell wall (78, 79). SpA was classified as a superantigen in 1995 due to its observed effect on B-cells (). However, SpA was first isolated in 1940 and identified in 1964 due to its Fc binding ability (78, 80). It comprises a 42 kDa protein arranged into five homologous domains (E-D-A-B-C), each forming a three α-helix bundle fold (Figure 5A) (81, 82). The domains are linked by conserved, flexible linkers (82). Native SpA also includes region X, a 12 x 8-residue repeat sequence which binds peptidoglycan. All 5 A-E domains can bind both Fc and Fab fragments (83). The binding affinity for specific immunoglobulins depends on the isotype and species origin. In humans, SpA binds strongly to IgG1, IgG2, IgG4 and weakly to IgA1, IgA2 and IgM. Mutations R435H and F436Y on hIgG3 have been identified as the reason SpA cannot bind human IgG3 (84). Interestingly, mutations in CDR2 from the therapeutic antibodies Herceptin and Pertuzumab were shown to contribute to binding SpA (85).
Figure 5
SpG was first identified in 1984 by Björck and Kronvall (86) and subsequently described as a B-cell superantigen. The sequence of SpG differs depending on the Streptococcus strain of origin (Figure 5B). SpG from group C Streptococcus sp. contains 2 immunoglobulin binding domains (B1-B2) whereas group G has 3 (C1-C2-C3) (87–89). Between each immunoglobulin binding domain are ‘spacers’, known as D domains. All SpG immunoglobulin-binding domains can bind both the Fc and Fab fragments (83). SpG has provided an alternative to SpA in antibody manufacturing, due it its ability to bind some antibody isotypes not recognised by SpA. It can strongly bind to all four human IgG subclasses (IgG1, IgG2, IgG3 and IgG4).
PpL was shown to induce apoptosis in B-cells by binding to the VL region outside of the CDRs of BCRs, fulfilling the definition of a B-cell superantigen (90). It was first isolated in 1985 and characterised as an immunoglobulin-binding protein capable of binding to the variable light chain in 1988 (79, 91). Of the two most common strains of Peptostreptococcus magnus, strain 312 produces a 79 kDa, 5 domain (B1-B2-B3-B4-B5) protein whereas strain 3316 expresses a 106 kDa 4 domain (C1-C2-C3-C4) protein (Figure 5C) (92). PpL recognizes the light chain exclusively and cannot bind to the Fc region. This makes it highly suitable for affinity-purification of non-IgG antibodies (93, 94).
All three B-cell superantigens (SpA, SpG and PpL) share several common features; they form small, stable, multidomain structures with a ‘beads on a string’ type structure. Kim et al. compared antibody levels of IgG and VH3+ IgM in mice when infected with SpA mutants with one to 6 domains. The results showed that the optimal number of immunoglobulin binding domains to induce the largest B-cell response was 5 (95). This observation suggests that B-cell superantigens are driven by the need for multivalency of binding and the consequent improved cross-linking of BCRs. These results were corroborated by a similar study with PpL (92). Although SpG and PpL share no significant sequence homology (15%), their immunoglobulin binding domains have similar folds, forming a β-sheet packed against a single α-helix. A gene transfer event between Streptococcus aureus and Peptostreptococcus magnus has been proposed to explain a possible common evolutionary origin of SpG and PpL (96). All three B-cell superantigens also utilise regions W and M for crossing the cell membrane, featuring the common Gram-positive protein anchoring motif LPXTG (97, 98). SpG and PpL also contain albumin binding domains (99, 100), which are absent in SpA.
Cellular Responses to B-Cell Superantigens
B-cell superantigens cross-link BCRs to activate BCR dependent signalling (101, 102). This initial signal transduction leads to the downregulation of BCRs, and an upregulation of several cluster of differentiation (CD) receptors (102), resulting in B-cell capping (summarized schematically in Figure 6). MHC Class II is also upregulated (102). The upregulation of these receptors leads to the activation of pro-apoptotic signals, such as Caspase 3, causing mitochondrial permeabilization and apoptosis (, 101, 102). Recently it has been shown that SpA B-cell superantigen activity is dependent on the presence of the LPXTG anchoring motif as well as the ‘LysM domain’ between region X and the LPXTG motif (103). These observations imply SpA must be bound to peptidoglycan to cause B-cell stimulation.
Figure 6
The precise functional role of microbial B-cell superantigens binding to Fc is obscure, although it has been shown recently that soluble IgG is a requirement for the successful activation of BCRs by SpA (104). The efficiency of BCR activation was dependent on the strength of Fc binding to each IgG subclass (104). The binding of SpA-IgG complex to BCR is predicted to increase the functional valency of the complex (104). SpA-IgG is thought to form a ‘lattice’ structure around the B-cells by crosslinking BCR Fab with IgG Fc and other BCR Fab regions promoting a sustained stimulation.
Other potential functions of the B-cell superantigen-immunoglobulin interaction are the blocking of immunoglobulin effector functions, opsonization and immunoglobulin-mediated phagocytosis, antibody-dependent cell mediated cytotoxicity (ADCC) and complement-dependent cytotoxicity (CDC) (105–107). Expression of B-cell superantigens ultimately leads to B-cell depletion and evasion of the immune system: in this sense, they can be considered as virulence factors (108–111).
SpA, SpG and PpL bind to BCRs at different sites on the Fab fragment, although the activation results in similar cellular responses. SpG binds to the CH1 domain (112), implying isotype dependent binding, whereas SpA binds to the VH3 family only. A comparison of the conservation of key residues between the seven VH families shows that, although many residues are conserved, there are several which are key and which, when mutated, result in the loss of binding for SpA (113), including in the VH-CDR2 (85). PpL domains only bind the κ light chain VL region and therefore lacks the ability to bind λ chains. The binding affinity of PpL differs between the families of κ light chain, specifically to FW1: it can bind to human Vκ I, III and IV, but not II (114, 115).
Several T-cell superantigens have the ability to bind BCRs, although generally in a weak and non-specific manner (), and without a B-cell response. Exceptions have been noted, for example, SEA increased the survival of VH3 B-cells (116). SED has also been shown to increase survival of VH4 B-cells (117). However, the in vivo response is yet to be determined.
Recent research suggests that B-cell superantigens also enhance immune defences (118). Two superantigens have been identified from the commensal bacteria Lachnospiraceae sp: Immunoglobulin Binding Proteins A (IbpA) and B (IbpB). Both were observed to activate BCRs by binding VH3 leading to the increased secretion of IgA, although this was only shown in vitro.
B-Cell Superantigen-Fab Complex Interfaces
The crystal structure of the SpA and IgM Fab complex is illustrated in Figure 7A, showing that the interface occurs at the VH domain (involving residues from β-strands B to E) of the Fab fragment and α-helices 2 and 3 of SpA (113). The interface is dominated by polar residues with three negatively charged residues from SpA and two positively charged residues from Fab forming electrostatic interactions (113). All SpA domains can bind to the Fab fragment (119), and each domain varies in its affinity towards VH3. The interacting residues form a predominantly hydrophilic interface forming several cross-interface bonds.
Figure 7
SpG domain C2 co-crystalized with IgG Fab (Figure 7B): the interface forms an antiparallel alignment between the last β-strand of the CH1 domain and the second β-strand of SpG (120). The antiparallel complex also results in interactions occurring between first β-strand of CH1 and the C-terminal end of the α-helix of SpG (121). The interface is formed by mostly hydrophilic residues flanking a small hydrophobic patch.
The first of two binding sites of PpL to IgM Fab is shown in (Figure 7C). The majority of the interface occurs at framework region 1 (FR1) of the VL region, with several contacts occurring outside of the VL region: K107 between the VL and CL regions, E143 from the CL region and R24 on the β-strand of CDR-L1 of IgM Fab. The interface includes residues from the α-helix and second β-strand of PpL domain B1 (122). The interface has a high affinity (Kd: 110 nM) (123), forming a predominantly hydrophilic interaction characterised by 9 H-bonds, although several residues have been proposed as hotspots from in silico alanine scanning of the Fab and PpL (115, 123, 124). Interestingly, recent evidence showed distal FWR3 effects on the PpL binding site at the FW1 (125) adding to the considerations for the light chain pairing with the heavy chain (126, 127).
The second binding site is formed from 15 residues at β-strands A, B, C and D of the VL region of IgM Fab, and the α-helix and third β-strand of PpL (Figure 7D). Although the second binding site is slightly larger and composed of more cross-interface contacts, it has a lower binding affinity (3.4 µM) (115). The first and second binding sites of PpL share only one common residue from PpL (R52) but 10 out of 15 residues from IgM Fab.
B-Cell Superantigen-FC Binding
The crystal structure of a single domain from SpA was determined in complex with IgG Fc: it showed that the protein-protein interface occurs between α-helix 1 and 2 of SpA domain B and CH2 and CH3 of the Fc (113) (Figure 8A). The residues forming the interface are generally hydrophilic (128). SpA residues Q9, Q10, D36 and D37, are conserved in the five immunoglobulin binding domains of SpA and are required for Fc binding (129). Mutating residue H435 in IgG eliminates SpA binding, as this residue is situated on the C-terminus of the CH3 region and protrudes into the CH2-CH3 cleft forming surface contacts with SpA (84).
Figure 8
The crystal structure of SpG C2 in complex with IgG Fc showed that it binds at the same site as SpA, with SpG binding to IgG Fc at the CH2-CH3 interface (Figure 8B). SpG fits within the CH2-CH3 cleft and binds through residues on the α-helix and third β-strand. As they recognise essentially the same site, SpA and SpG bind competitively to IgG Fc (130, 131). The strong binding affinity of SpG for IgG Fc is contributed by a hydrophobic pocket surrounded by hydrophilic residues. Comparing the binding sites of SpG for Fab and Fc, Fab binding uses β-strands 1 and 2 as well as the α-helix, whereas Fc binding uses β-strand 3 as well as a more prominent contribution of α-helix residues.
Physicochemical Characteristics of T and B Cell Superantigen Interfaces
The structures of the complexes of T and B-cell superantigens with immune macromolecules were examined to compare the nature of the interfaces with all other structures of protein-protein complexes. A list was compiled from the Protein Data Bank, extracting specific data on hydrophobicity, number of hydrogen bonds, salt bridges, interface area, binding affinity, and charges at the interface. These values were then condensed onto a two-dimensional plot using t-distributed stochastic neighbor embedding, such that each point represents a complex (Figure 9).
Figure 9
Complexes were categorized according to function: most were well dispersed by functional category, although peptide complexes tended to predominate in the upper half of the plot (Figure 8A). The superantigen complexes are grouped in the central and right side of the plot, indicating that their binding interfaces share some physicochemical characteristics (Figure 9B). An explanation for this phenomenon is that T-cell and B-cell superantigen interactions are transient-type complexes, as defined by Noreen and Thornton (132). Such complexes tend to be small and less hydrophobic than obligate, homo oligomeric complexes. Both T- and B-cell superantigen interfaces form interface areas less than 1000 Å2 and range from slightly to very hydrophilic.
The T-cell superantigens are located on the centre and right-hand side of the plot and are more scattered than the B-cell superantigen interfaces (Figure 9B). The interface areas of T-cell and B-cell superantigens have similar ranges: 436 – 944 Å2 and 517 – 714 Å2 respectively. Fractional hydrophobicity of the T-cell superantigen interfaces range from 18 – 49%, similar to those for B-cell superantigens (9 – 40%).
Although B-cell superantigens recognise different binding sites within the Fab molecule (VH, VL and CH1) they share very similar interface physicochemical properties, which align closely to those seen in peptide complexes.
The fact that superantigens are promiscuous and capable of recognition of different binding partners indicates there is scope for improving binding affinity and extending specificity for specific targets. The observation that B-cell superantigens, and more specifically superantigen-Fab complexes, are physicochemically similar may allow for development of engineering strategies which makes use of this facility. Nonetheless, just as we expanded the definition of superantigens in this review to include B-cell activation based on new findings, we are also aware of novel superantigen-like behaviours by non-proteins e.g., nickel (133) that may in time be included as superantigens in the future.
Superantigen Applications
Superantigens have been employed in multiple applications, both clinically and industrially. Though many improvements have been made, there is room to engineer and expand their scope and applications. Understanding the biochemistry of the superantigen-antibody interfaces provides an information resource for the development of novel biotechnological and pharmaceutical applications.
Industrial
Since the approval of the first therapeutic monoclonal antibody in 1986 (Muromonab-CD3), the use of antibody-based drugs has expanded significantly with technological developments such as scFv, antibody-drug conjugates (ADCs) and bispecifics. In 2019, 70% of all biopharmaceutical products sold were monoclonal antibodies in a market worth over $150 billion. Antibody-based drugs continue to increase their market share, with current estimates predicting global revenue to increase to over $300 billion by 2025 (134). The expansion of antibody-based drugs has therefore created a need for improved manufacturing and purification processes.
The most prominent industrial application of B-cell superantigens is their use as affinity resins for the purification of antibodies, allowing highly efficient separation of antibodies for clinical and research applications. Improvement of these affinity resins has allowed pharmaceutical companies to develop cost-effective antibody purification techniques, increasing the feasibility of large-scale manufacturing of antibodies, resulting in the expansion of the industry. There are, however, some limitations; 80% of the downstream processing cost occurs at the capture and purification phase (135), and there is no single resin which can bind all antibody isotypes from all species of interest. Furthermore, antibodies are eluted from the affinity resins at low pH values, frequently causing aggregation.
Some investigators have engineered superantigens to optimize their application in antibody purification (136, 137). For example “Domain Z” was developed in 1987- a mutant of Domain B with two mutations, A1V and G29A (138), which resulted in SpA losing the ability to bind VH3-Fab while retaining Fc affinity (139); this innovation allows for the selective purification of the Fc fragment after pepsin digestion. One such Z domain affinity resin is Cytiva’s mAb Select SuRe (140). When testing mutant N23T, the stability of the SpA Z domain resin increased (141). Recently a new SpA resin has been developed: AviPure. This resin is formed of two B domains with two cysteine and histidine residues at the C-terminus to the steric hindrance, increasing binding capacity and increasing its resistance to pHs extremes, while retaining high binding affinity (135). Affinity resins undergo cleaning in place (CIP) procedures commonly using 0.5 M NaOH; therefore, affinity resins with high alkaline stability are desirable. To address the issue with CIP procedures, SpA was shown to have higher alkaline stability with a single mutation at position 29, with G29W being the most stable (142). Two further mutations N23T and F30A to the SpA Z domain resulted in a higher alkaline resistance when compared to wild type (143). SpA Z domain was also engineered to include six glycine residues on the second loop, which resulted in an increase in the elution pH (143). Wild type SpA is less susceptible to extreme alkaline conditions, with a half-life of 16 h (141) compared to SpG, which has a half-life of under 10 mins (144). Asn residues were identified as the most susceptible to deamination: mutation of all three Asn residues of SpG (N8T, N35A and N37A) improved alkaline stability by 8-fold (145). SpG was further demonstrated to have higher alkaline stability when three other mutations Y3F, T16I and T1I were introduced (145). By increasing alkaline stability, the lifespan of affinity resins can be increased, lowering the overall cost of antibody production. It has also been recently demonstrated that adding an additional alkaline wash step after the antibody capture step results in a decrease in antibody aggregation, lower impurity levels and an increase in antibody yield (146).
With the development of new formats such as single chain variable fragments (scFvs), strong Fab binding is required. Unfortunately, SpA and SpG have lower binding affinities for the Fab fragment compared to Fc. PpL has the advantage over other B-cell superantigens of binding strongly to the Vκ of scFv, (Kd = 4.5nM) (147). The scFv structural arrangement consists of the VH and VL domains connected by a short linker. scFv molecules have the advantage of retaining the CDRs while being significantly smaller than whole antibodies. SpA can also bind scFv but at a lower binding affinity than PpL, whereas SpG is unable to bind scFv. The most significant downside for the use of PpL as an affinity resin is its inability to bind λ light chains. Therefore, in human antibody production, roughly 34% of the antibodies will not bind to the resin, suggesting that engineering PpL to bind λ light chains could be valuable.
Clinical Usage
Diagnostics Potential
Superantigens are used to detect IgG in serum (148), making use of their immunoglobulin binding specificity. On the contrary, superantigens recognized by IgGs allow for the detection of Staphylococcus aureus (149, 150) in disease states.
Engineering of superantigens to be specific to regions of TCRs or antibody V-region families or isotypes for the development of diagnostic kits could be applied to the quantification of disease-associated proteins e.g. IgE in allergy. The ability to specifically bind antibodies can also allow its development in easy-to-use, non-technical point-of-care testing home-use devices (151), as recently applied during the COVID-19 pandemic. Such superantigen-based diagnostics can be coupled with colorimetric, home-made devices [e.g. mobile spectrophotometers (152, 153)]. Given the increasing association of antibody VH families with certain diseases e.g. [VH5 in nickel allergy (85)], superantigens that can differentiate antibody VH families have clear potential in diagnostic kit development.
Therapeutic Potential
The role of superantigens in sepsis, a leading cause of death listed by the WHO, makes them an important target for toxic-shock syndrome (154). Several short peptide regions (~40 residues) from SEA and SPEA have been identified as causes of vasodilation (155), suggesting an application in the development of antihypertension drugs.
Superantigens can also be used as a target for an anti-Staphylococcus aureus vaccine. There have been several attempts at producing a vaccine against S. aureus, without success, although it has been shown that the use of anti-SpA antibodies leads to the promotion of opsonophagocytic clearance of Staphylococcus aureus (156, 157).
Superantigens have also shown promise in the treatment of cancer through a synergistic effect with antibodies in the recruitment of T-cells (158). The ability of SEB to hyper-stimulate and proliferate CAR T-cells led to a more effective antitumour response when used in combination (159). PpL has been shown to induce apoptosis in malignant κ+ B cell lymphomas in humans and mice (160), demonstrating the potential use of superantigens as anti-cancer drugs, particularly when sagaciously paired with a suitable Vκ light chain (94). A range of potential T-cell superantigen-based anticancer drugs have been recently reviewed (161), including SEB, demonstrating the ability to inhibit metastasis and tumour growth (162). Several Fab-superantigen fusion proteins show promising Phase I/II clinical trial results. A major drawback with using superantigens is their potential to elicit a toxic response. One way to prevent this is to reduce the over-stimulation of T-cells. SEA was split into two functionally inactive domains and attached to a scFv. When used in combination, the two SEA fragments reassemble, forming a functionally active superantigen and resulting in the selective activation of T-cells (163). Another way to avoid superantigen toxicity is to utilize superantigen-like proteins which, as mentioned previously, are very similar in structure and function, although they do not result in emesis. They have been shown to inhibit tumour growth by 30% without significant toxicity (164).
The importance of understanding superantigens goes beyond bacterial sepsis to viruses, where for example, SARS-CoV2 spike protein displays superantigen properties (165, 166) causing multisystem inflammatory syndrome in children through its unspecific activation of T-cells (167).
Summary
With the development of new clinical therapeutics, B-cell superantigen engineering presents an opportunity to develop novel applications, as well as improving current superantigen-based technology, such as purification resins. Structural information on B-cell superantigen interfaces has been useful in providing a basis for the engineering of binding characteristics. The application of protein engineering principles offers considerable scope for directed modification of superantigen binding properties and harnessing for applications in medicine and the pharmaceutical industry.
Funding
AD is a PhD student funded by The University of Manchester, UK and the Agency for Science, Technology and Research (A*STAR), Singapore. This review was partially funded by the National Research Foundation (NRF) Singapore grant to Experimental Drug Development Centre (EDDC), ASTAR.
Publisher’s Note
All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article, or claim that may be made by its manufacturer, is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.
Statements
Author contributions
AD wrote the manuscript, with critical revisions from SG and JD. AD and JD prepared the figures. All authors contributed to the article and approved the submitted version.
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.
References
1
WhiteJHermanAPullenAMKuboRKapplerJWMarrackP. The V Beta-Specific Superantigen Staphylococcal Enterotoxin B: Stimulation of Mature T Cells and Clonal Deletion in Neonatal Mice. Cell (1989) 56:27–35. doi: 10.1016/0092-8674(89)90980-x
2
SethASternLJOttenhoffTHEngelIOwenMJLambJRet al. Binary and Ternary Complexes Between T-Cell Receptor, Class II MHC and Superantigen In Vitro. Nature (1994) 369:324–7. doi: 10.1038/369324a0
3
PascualVCapraJD. B-Cell Superantigens? Curr Biol (1991) 1:315–7. doi: 10.1016/0960-9822(91)90097-g
4
LevinsonAIKozlowskiLZhengYWheatleyL. B-Cell Superantigens: Definition and Potential Impact on the Immune Response. J Clin Immunol (1995) 15:26S–36S. doi: 10.1007/BF01540891
5
SilvermanGJGoodyearCS. Confounding B-Cell Defences: Lessons From a Staphylococcal Superantigen. Nat Rev Immunol (2006) 6:465–75. doi: 10.1038/nri1853
6
ChoiYLaffertyJAClementsJRToddJKGelfandEWKapplerJet al. Selective Expansion of T Cells Expressing V Beta 2 in Toxic Shock Syndrome. J Exp Med (1990) 172:981–4. doi: 10.1084/jem.172.3.981
7
KotzinBLLeungDYKapplerJMarrackP. Superantigens and Their Potential Role in Human Disease. Adv Immunol (1993) 54:99–166. doi: 10.1016/s0065-2776(08)60534-9
8
ProftTFraserJD. Bacterial Superantigens. Clin Exp Immunol (2003) 133:299–306. doi: 10.1046/j.1365-2249.2003.02203.x
9
FraserJDProftT. The Bacterial Superantigen and Superantigen-Like Proteins. Immunol Rev (2008) 225:226–43. doi: 10.1111/j.1600-065X.2008.00681.x
10
ThomasDChouSDauwalderOLinaG. Diversity in Staphylococcus Aureus Enterotoxins. Chem Immunol Allergy (2007) 93:24–41. doi: 10.1159/000100856
11
LiSJHuDLMainaEKShinagawaKOmoeKNakaneA. Superantigenic Activity of Toxic Shock Syndrome Toxin-1 Is Resistant to Heating and Digestive Enzymes. J Appl Microbiol (2011) 110:729–36. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2672.2010.04927.x
12
ArgudinMAMendozaMCRodicioMR. Food Poisoning and Staphylococcus Aureus Enterotoxins. Toxins (Basel) (2010) 2:1751–73. doi: 10.3390/toxins2071751
13
HermanAKapplerJWMarrackPPullenAM. Superantigens: Mechanism of T-Cell Stimulation and Role in Immune Responses. Annu Rev Immunol (1991) 9:745–72. doi: 10.1146/annurev.iy.09.040191.003525
14
MartinGSManninoDMEatonSMossM. The Epidemiology of Sepsis in the United States From 1979 Through 2000. N Engl J Med (2003) 348:1546–54. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa022139
15
BergdollMSCrassBAReiserRFRobbinsRNDavisJP. A New Staphylococcal Enterotoxin, Enterotoxin F, Associated With Toxic-Shock-Syndrome Staphylococcus Aureus Isolates. Lancet (1981) 1:1017–21. doi: 10.1016/s0140-6736(81)92186-3
16
SchlievertPMShandsKNDanBBSchmidGPNishimuraRD. Identification and Characterization of an Exotoxin From Staphylococcus Aureus Associated With Toxic-Shock Syndrome. J Infect Dis (1981) 143:509–16. doi: 10.1093/infdis/143.4.509
17
StevensDLTannerMHWinshipJSwartsRRiesKMSchlievertPMet al. Severe Group A Streptococcal Infections Associated With a Toxic Shock-Like Syndrome and Scarlet Fever Toxin a. N Engl J Med (1989) 321:1–7. doi: 10.1056/NEJM198907063210101
18
KimJKimBEAhnKLeungDYM. Interactions Between Atopic Dermatitis and Staphylococcus Aureus Infection: Clinical Implications. Allergy Asthma Immunol Res (2019) 11:593–603. doi: 10.4168/aair.2019.11.5.593
19
JenkinsonEJKingstonROwenJJ. Newly Generated Thymocytes Are Not Refractory to Deletion When the Alpha/Beta Component of the T Cell Receptor is Engaged by the Superantigen Staphylococcal Enterotoxin B. Eur J Immunol (1990) 20:2517–20. doi: 10.1002/eji.1830201125
20
CoppolaMABlackmanMA. Bacterial Superantigens Reactivate Antigen-Specific CD8+ Memory T Cells. Int Immunol (1997) 9:1393–403. doi: 10.1093/intimm/9.9.1393
21
MurphyKMHeimbergerABLohDY. Induction by Antigen of Intrathymic Apoptosis of CD4+CD8+TCRlo Thymocytes In Vivo. Science (1990) 250:1720–3. doi: 10.1126/science.2125367
22
LinYSLeiHYLowTLShenCLChouLJJanMS. In Vivo Induction of Apoptosis in Immature Thymocytes by Staphylococcal Enterotoxin B. J Immunol (1992) 149:1156–63.
23
MeilleurCEWardellCMMeleTSDikeakosJDBenninkJRMuHHet al. Bacterial Superantigens Expand and Activate, Rather Than Delete or Incapacitate, Preexisting Antigen-Specific Memory CD8+ T Cells. J Infect Dis (2019) 219:1307–17. doi: 10.1093/infdis/jiy647
24
XuRShearsRKSharmaRKrishnaMWebbCAliRet al. IL-35 is Critical in Suppressing Superantigenic Staphylococcus Aureus-Driven Inflammatory Th17 Responses in Human Nasopharynx-Associated Lymphoid Tissue. Mucosal Immunol (2020) 13:460–70. doi: 10.1038/s41385-019-0246-1
25
FlorquinSAmraouiZAbramowiczDGoldmanM. Systemic Release and Protective Role of IL-10 in Staphylococcal Enterotoxin B-Induced Shock in Mice. J Immunol (1994) 153:2618–23.
26
MacDonaldHRBaschieriSLeesRK. Clonal Expansion Precedes Anergy and Death of V Beta 8+ Peripheral T Cells Responding to Staphylococcal Enterotoxin B In Vivo. Eur J Immunol (1991) 21:1963–6. doi: 10.1002/eji.1830210827
27
WatsonARJanikDKLeeWT. Superantigen-Induced CD4 Memory T Cell Anergy. I. Staphylococcal Enterotoxin B Induces Fyn-Mediated Negative Signaling. Cell Immunol (2012) 276:16–25. doi: 10.1016/j.cellimm.2012.02.003
28
XuSXGilmoreKJSzaboPAZeppaJJBarojaMLHaeryfarSMet al. Superantigens Subvert the Neutrophil Response to Promote Abscess Formation and Enhance Staphylococcus Aureus Survival In Vivo. Infect Immun (2014) 82:3588–98. doi: 10.1128/IAI.02110-14
29
GreshamHDLowranceJHCaverTEWilsonBSCheungALLindbergFP. Survival of Staphylococcus Aureus Inside Neutrophils Contributes to Infection. J Immunol (2000) 164:3713–22. doi: 10.4049/jimmunol.164.7.3713
30
PidwillGRGibsonJFColeJRenshawSAFosterSJ. The Role of Macrophages in Staphylococcus Aureus Infection. Front Immunol (2020) 11:620339. doi: 10.3389/fimmu.2020.620339
31
ZengXMooreTANewsteadMWDengJCLukacsNWStandifordTJ. IP-10 Mediates Selective Mononuclear Cell Accumulation and Activation in Response to Intrapulmonary Transgenic Expression and During Adenovirus-Induced Pulmonary Inflammation. J Interferon Cytokine Res (2005) 25:103–12. doi: 10.1089/jir.2005.25.103
32
LeiLAltstaedtJvon der OheMProftTGrossURinkL. Induction of Interleukin-8 in Human Neutrophils After MHC Class II Cross-Linking With Superantigens. J Leukoc Biol (2001) 70:80–6. doi: 10.1189/jlb.70.1.80
33
GainetJDangPMChollet-MartinSBrionMSixouMHakimJet al. Neutrophil Dysfunctions, IL-8, and Soluble L-Selectin Plasma Levels in Rapidly Progressive Versus Adult and Localized Juvenile Periodontitis: Variations According to Disease Severity and Microbial Flora. J Immunol (1999) 163:5013–9.
34
TuffsSWJamesDBABestebroerJRichardsACGonchevaMIO’SheaMet al. The Staphylococcus Aureus Superantigen SElX Is a Bifunctional Toxin That Inhibits Neutrophil Function. PloS Pathog (2017) 13:e1006461. doi: 10.1371/journal.ppat.1006461
35
GonzalezCDLedoCGiaiCGarofaloAGomezMI. The Sbi Protein Contributes to Staphylococcus Aureus Inflammatory Response During Systemic Infection. PloS One (2015) 10:e0131879. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0131879
36
PliyevBKDimitrievaTVSavchenkoVG. Cytokine-Mediated Induction of MHC Class II in Human Neutrophils Is Dependent on NADPH Oxidase Activity. Eur J Cell Biol (2015) 94:67–70. doi: 10.1016/j.ejcb.2014.11.001
37
Noli TruantSDe MarziMCSarrateaMBAntonoglouMBMeoAPIannantuono LopezLVet al. Egc Superantigens Impair Monocytes/Macrophages Inducing Cell Death and Inefficient Activation. Front Immunol (2019) 10:3008. doi: 10.3389/fimmu.2019.03008
38
ChenCLWuYYLinCFKuoCFHanCLWangSet al. Streptococcal Pyrogenic Exotoxin B Inhibits Apoptotic Cell Clearance by Macrophages Through Protein S Cleavage. Sci Rep (2016) 6:26026. doi: 10.1038/srep26026
39
WatanabeIIchikiMShiratsuchiANakanishiY. TLR2-Mediated Survival of Staphylococcus Aureus in Macrophages: A Novel Bacterial Strategy Against Host Innate Immunity. J Immunol (2007) 178:4917–25. doi: 10.4049/jimmunol.178.8.4917
40
NabaviNFreemanGJGaultAGodfreyDNadlerLMGlimcherLH. Signalling Through the MHC Class II Cytoplasmic Domain is Required for Antigen Presentation and Induces B7 Expression. Nature (1992) 360:266–8. doi: 10.1038/360266a0
41
MouradWSchollPDiazAGehaRChatilaT. The Staphylococcal Toxic Shock Syndrome Toxin 1 Triggers B Cell Proliferation and Differentiation via Major Histocompatibility Complex-Unrestricted Cognate T/B Cell Interaction. J Exp Med (1989) 170:2011–22. doi: 10.1084/jem.170.6.2011
42
Bekeredjian-DingIInamuraSGieseTMollHEndresSSingAet al. Staphylococcus Aureus Protein A Triggers T Cell-Independent B Cell Proliferation by Sensitizing B Cells for TLR2 Ligands. J Immunol (2007) 178:2803–12. doi: 10.4049/jimmunol.178.5.2803
43
ParcinaMMiranda-GarciaMADurlanikSZieglerSOverBGeorgPet al. Pathogen-Triggered Activation of Plasmacytoid Dendritic Cells Induces IL-10-Producing B Cells in Response to Staphylococcus Aureus. J Immunol (2013) 190:1591–602. doi: 10.4049/jimmunol.1201222
44
NaritaKHuDLAsanoKNakaneA. Interleukin-10 (IL-10) Produced by Mutant Toxic Shock Syndrome Toxin 1 Vaccine-Induced Memory T Cells Downregulates IL-17 Production and Abrogates the Protective Effect Against Staphylococcus Aureus Infection. Infect Immun (2019) 87:1–12. doi: 10.1128/IAI.00494-19
45
KeenerABThurlowLTKangSSpidaleNAClarkeSHCunnionKMet al. Staphylococcus Aureus Protein A Disrupts Immunity Mediated by Long-Lived Plasma Cells. J Immunol (2017) 198:1263–73. doi: 10.4049/jimmunol.1600093
46
ParcinaMWendtCGoetzFZawatzkyRZahringerUHeegKet al. Staphylococcus Aureus-Induced Plasmacytoid Dendritic Cell Activation Is Based on an IgG-Mediated Memory Response. J Immunol (2008) 181:3823–33. doi: 10.4049/jimmunol.181.6.3823
47
BhardwajNFriedmanSMColeBCNisanianAJ. Dendritic Cells are Potent Antigen-Presenting Cells for Microbial Superantigens. J Exp Med (1992) 175:267–73. doi: 10.1084/jem.175.1.267
48
CoutantKDde FraissinetteABCordierAUlrichP. Modulation of the Activity of Human Monocyte-Derived Dendritic Cells by Chemical Haptens, a Metal Allergen, and a Staphylococcal Superantigen. Toxicol Sci (1999) 52:189–98. doi: 10.1093/toxsci/52.2.189
49
WuXXuF. Dendritic Cells During Staphylococcus Aureus Infection: Subsets and Roles. J Transl Med (2014) 12:358. doi: 10.1186/s12967-014-0358-z
50
LaanMCuiZHHoshinoHLotvallJSjostrandMGruenertDCet al. Neutrophil Recruitment by Human IL-17 via C-X-C Chemokine Release in the Airways. J Immunol (1999) 162:2347–52.
51
McLoughlinRMSolingaRMRichJZaleskiKJCocchiaroJLRisleyAet al. CD4+ T Cells and CXC Chemokines Modulate the Pathogenesis of Staphylococcus Aureus Wound Infections. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA (2006) 103:10408–13. doi: 10.1073/pnas.0508961103
52
McLoughlinRMLeeJCKasperDLTzianabosAO. IFN-Gamma Regulated Chemokine Production Determines the Outcome of Staphylococcus Aureus Infection. J Immunol (2008) 181:1323–32. doi: 10.4049/jimmunol.181.2.1323
53
AradGLevyRNasieIHillmanDRotfogelZBarashUet al. Binding of Superantigen Toxins Into the CD28 Homodimer Interface is Essential for Induction of Cytokine Genes That Mediate Lethal Shock. PloS Biol (2011) 9:e1001149. doi: 10.1371/journal.pbio.1001149
54
LevyRRotfogelZHillmanDPopugailoAAradGSupperEet al. Superantigens Hyperinduce Inflammatory Cytokines by Enhancing the B7-2/CD28 Costimulatory Receptor Interaction. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA (2016) 113:E6437–46. doi: 10.1073/pnas.1603321113
55
KaempferRPopugailoALevyRAradGHillmanDRotfogelZ. Bacterial Superantigen Toxins Induce a Lethal Cytokine Storm by Enhancing B7-2/CD28 Costimulatory Receptor Engagement, a Critical Immune Checkpoint. Receptors Clin Investig (2017) 4:1–9. doi: 10.14800/rci.1500
56
PopugailoARotfogelZSupperEHillmanDKaempferR. Staphylococcal and Streptococcal Superantigens Trigger B7/CD28 Costimulatory Receptor Engagement to Hyperinduce Inflammatory Cytokines. Front Immunol (2019) 10:942. doi: 10.3389/fimmu.2019.00942
57
YamasakiSTachibanaMShinoharaNIwashimaM. Lck-Independent Triggering of T-Cell Antigen Receptor Signal Transduction by Staphylococcal Enterotoxins. J Biol Chem (1997) 272:14787–91. doi: 10.1074/jbc.272.23.14787
58
BuenoCLemkeCDCriadoGBarojaMLFergusonSSRahmanAKet al. Bacterial Superantigens Bypass Lck-Dependent T Cell Receptor Signaling by Activating a Galpha11-Dependent, PLC-Beta-Mediated Pathway. Immunity (2006) 25:67–78. doi: 10.1016/j.immuni.2006.04.012
59
LiZZeppaJJHancockMAMcCormickJKDohertyTMHendyGNet al. Staphylococcal Superantigens Use LAMA2 as a Coreceptor To Activate T Cells. J Immunol (2018) 200:1471–9. doi: 10.4049/jimmunol.1701212
60
LiYLiHDimasiNMcCormickJKMartinRSchuckPet al. Crystal Structure of a Superantigen Bound to the High-Affinity, Zinc-Dependent Site on MHC Class II. Immunity (2001) 14:93–104. doi: 10.1016/s1074-7613(01)00092-9
61
PlessDDRuthelGReinkeEKUlrichRGBavariS. Persistence of Zinc-Binding Bacterial Superantigens at the Surface of Antigen-Presenting Cells Contributes to the Extreme Potency of These Superantigens as T-Cell Activators. Infect Immun (2005) 73:5358–66. doi: 10.1128/IAI.73.9.5358-5366.2005
62
PeterssonKHakanssonMNilssonHForsbergGSvenssonLALiljasAet al. Crystal Structure of a Superantigen Bound to MHC Class II Displays Zinc and Peptide Dependence. EMBO J (2001) 20:3306–12. doi: 10.1093/emboj/20.13.3306
63
NilssonHBjorkPDohlstenMAntonssonP. Staphylococcal Enterotoxin H Displays Unique MHC Class II-Binding Properties. J Immunol (1999) 163:6686–93.
64
HudsonKRTiedemannREUrbanRGLoweSCStromingerJLFraserJD. Staphylococcal Enterotoxin A has Two Cooperative Binding Sites on Major Histocompatibility Complex Class II. J Exp Med (1995) 182:711–20. doi: 10.1084/jem.182.3.711
65
TiedemannREFraserJD. Cross-Linking of MHC Class II Molecules by Staphylococcal Enterotoxin A Is Essential for Antigen-Presenting Cell and T Cell Activation. J Immunol (1996) 157:3958–66.
66
PeterssonKPetterssonHSkartvedNJWalseBForsbergG. Staphylococcal Enterotoxin H Induces V Alpha-Specific Expansion of T Cells. J Immunol (2003) 170:4148–54. doi: 10.4049/jimmunol.170.8.4148
67
SalineMRodstromKEFischerGOrekhovVYKarlssonBGLindkvist-PeterssonK. The Structure of Superantigen Complexed With TCR and MHC Reveals Novel Insights Into Superantigenic T Cell Activation. Nat Commun (2010) 1:119. doi: 10.1038/ncomms1117
68
PumphreyNVuidepotAJakobsenBForsbergGWalseBLindkvist-PeterssonK. Cutting Edge: Evidence of Direct TCR Alpha-Chain Interaction With Superantigen. J Immunol (2007) 179:2700–4. doi: 10.4049/jimmunol.179.5.2700
69
KrakauerT. Update on Staphylococcal Superantigen-Induced Signaling Pathways and Therapeutic Interventions. Toxins (Basel) (2013) 5:1629–54. doi: 10.3390/toxins5091629
70
KrakauerT. Differential Inhibitory Effects of Interleukin-10, Interleukin-4, and Dexamethasone on Staphylococcal Enterotoxin-Induced Cytokine Production and T Cell Activation. J Leukoc Biol (1995) 57:450–4. doi: 10.1002/jlb.57.3.450
71
BohachGAFastDJNelsonRDSchlievertPM. Staphylococcal and Streptococcal Pyrogenic Toxins Involved in Toxic Shock Syndrome and Related Illnesses. Crit Rev Microbiol (1990) 17:251–72. doi: 10.3109/10408419009105728
72
MarrackPKapplerJ. The Staphylococcal Enterotoxins and Their Relatives. Science (1990) 248:1066. doi: 10.1126/science.2343314
73
MiethkeTWahlCHeegKEchtenacherBKrammerPHWagnerH. T Cell-Mediated Lethal Shock Triggered in Mice by the Superantigen Staphylococcal Enterotoxin B: Critical Role of Tumor Necrosis Factor. J Exp Med (1992) 175:91–8. doi: 10.1084/jem.175.1.91
74
RodstromKEElbingKLindkvist-PeterssonK. Structure of the Superantigen Staphylococcal Enterotoxin B in Complex With TCR and Peptide-MHC Demonstrates Absence of TCR-Peptide Contacts. J Immunol (2014) 193:1998–2004. doi: 10.4049/jimmunol.1401268
75
LederLLleraALavoiePMLebedevaMILiHSekalyRPet al. A Mutational Analysis of the Binding of Staphylococcal Enterotoxins B and C3 to the T Cell Receptor Beta Chain and Major Histocompatibility Complex Class II. J Exp Med (1998) 187:823–33. doi: 10.1084/jem.187.6.823
76
KapplerJWHermanAClementsJMarrackP. Mutations Defining Functional Regions of the Superantigen Staphylococcal Enterotoxin B. J Exp Med (1992) 175:387–96. doi: 10.1084/jem.175.2.387
77
SilvermanGJSasanoMWormsleySB. Age-Associated Changes in Binding of Human B Lymphocytes to a VH3-Restricted Unconventional Bacterial Antigen. J Immunol (1993) 151:5840–55.
78
VerweyWF. A Type-Specific Antigenic Protein Derived From the Staphylococcus. J Exp Med (1940) 71:635–44. doi: 10.1084/jem.71.5.635
79
ErntellMMyhreEBKronvallG. Non-Immune IgG F(Ab’)2 Binding to Group C and G Streptococci is Mediated by Structures on Gamma Chains. Scand J Immunol (1985) 21:151–7. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-3083.1985.tb01414.x
80
OedingPGrovAMyklestadB. Immunochemical Studies on Antigen Preparations From Staphylococcus Aureus. 2. Precipitating and Erythrocyte-Sensitizing Properties of Protein a (Antigen a) and Related Substances. Acta Pathol Microbiol Scand (1964) 62:117–27. doi: 10.1111/apm.1964.62.1.117
81
MyersJKOasTG. Preorganized Secondary Structure as an Important Determinant of Fast Protein Folding. Nat Struct Biol (2001) 8:552–8. doi: 10.1038/88626
82
DeisLNPembleCQiYHagarmanARichardsonDCRichardsonJSet al. Multiscale Conformational Heterogeneity in Staphylococcal Protein a: Possible Determinant of Functional Plasticity. Structure (2014) 22:1467–77. doi: 10.1016/j.str.2014.08.014
83
MoksTAbrahmsenLNilssonBHellmanUSjoquistJUhlenM. Staphylococcal Protein A Consists of Five IgG-Binding Domains. Eur J Biochem (1986) 156:637–43. doi: 10.1111/j.1432-1033.1986.tb09625.x
84
JendebergLNilssonPLarssonADenkerPUhlenMNilssonBet al. Engineering of Fc(1) and Fc(3) From Human Immunoglobulin G to Analyse Subclass Specificity for Staphylococcal Protein a. J Immunol Methods (1997) 201:25–34. doi: 10.1016/s0022-1759(96)00215-3
85
LuaWHSuCTYeoJYPohJJLingWLPhuaSXet al. Role of the IgE Variable Heavy Chain in FcepsilonRIalpha and Superantigen Binding in Allergy and Immunotherapy. J Allergy Clin Immunol (2019) 144:514–23.e5. doi: 10.1016/j.jaci.2019.03.028
86
BjorckLKronvallG. Purification and Some Properties of Streptococcal Protein G, a Novel IgG-Binding Reagent. J Immunol (1984) 133:969–74.
87
GussBEliassonMOlssonAUhlenMFrejAKJornvallHet al. Structure of the IgG-Binding Regions of Streptococcal Protein G. EMBO J (1986) 5:1567–75. doi: 10.1002/j.1460-2075.1986.tb04398.x
88
SjobringUBjorckLKasternWStreptococcal proteinG. Gene Structure and Protein Binding Properties. J Biol Chem (1991) 266:399–405. doi: 10.1016/S0021-9258(18)52448-0
89
NilvebrantJHoberS. The Albumin-Binding Domain as a Scaffold for Protein Engineering. Comput Struct Biotechnol J (2013) 6:e201303009. doi: 10.5936/csbj.201303009
90
GoodyearCSNaritaMSilvermanGJ. In Vivo VL-Targeted Activation-Induced Apoptotic Supraclonal Deletion by a Microbial B Cell Toxin. J Immunol (2004) 172:2870–710. doi: 10.4049/jimmunol.172.5.2870
91
BjorckLProteinL. A Novel Bacterial Cell Wall Protein With Affinity for Ig L Chains. J Immunol (1988) 140:1194–7.
92
KasternWSjobringUBjorckL. Structure of Peptostreptococcal Protein L and Identification of a Repeated Immunoglobulin Light Chain-Binding Domain. J Biol Chem (1992) 267:12820–5. doi: 10.1016/S0021-9258(18)42349-6
93
LuaWHLingWLYeoJYPohJJLaneDPGanSK. The Effects of Antibody Engineering CH and CL in Trastuzumab and Pertuzumab Recombinant Models: Impact on Antibody Production and Antigen-Binding. Sci Rep (2018) 8:718. doi: 10.1038/s41598-017-18892-9
94
LingWLLuaWHGanSK. Sagacity in Antibody Humanization for Therapeutics, Diagnostics and Research Purposes: Considerations of Antibody Elements and Their Roles. Antib Ther (2020) 3:71–7910.
95
KimHKFalugiFMissiakasDMSchneewindO. Peptidoglycan-Linked Protein A Promotes T Cell-Dependent Antibody Expansion During Staphylococcus Aureus Infection. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA (2016) 113:5718–23. doi: 10.1073/pnas.1524267113
96
GowardCRScawenMDMurphyJPAtkinsonT. Molecular Evolution of Bacterial Cell-Surface Proteins. Trends Biochem Sci (1993) 18:136–40. doi: 10.1016/0968-0004(93)90021-e
97
SchneewindOModelPFischettiVA. Sorting of Protein A to the Staphylococcal Cell Wall. Cell (1992) 70:267–81. doi: 10.1016/0092-8674(92)90101-h
98
NavarreWWSchneewindO. Surface Proteins of Gram-Positive Bacteria and Mechanisms of Their Targeting to the Cell Wall Envelope. Microbiol Mol Biol Rev (1999) 63:174–229. doi: 10.1128/MMBR.63.1.174-229.1999
99
AkerstromBNielsenEBjorckL. Definition of IgG- and Albumin-Binding Regions of Streptococcal Protein G. J Biol Chem (1987) 262:13388–91. doi: 10.1016/S0021-9258(19)76438-2
100
MurphyJPDugglebyCJAtkinsonMATrowernARAtkinsonTGowardCR. The Functional Units of a Peptostreptococcal Protein L. Mol Microbiol (1994) 12:911–20. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2958.1994.tb01079.x
101
BrokerBMHoltfreterSBekeredjian-DingI. Immune Control of Staphylococcus Aureus - Regulation and Counter-Regulation of the Adaptive Immune Response. Int J Med Microbiol (2014) 304:204–14. doi: 10.1016/j.ijmm.2013.11.008
102
GoodyearCSSilvermanGJ. Death by a B Cell Superantigen: In Vivo VH-Targeted Apoptotic Supraclonal B Cell Deletion by a Staphylococcal Toxin. J Exp Med (2003) 197:1125–39. doi: 10.1084/jem.20020552
103
ShiMWillingSEKimHKSchneewindOMissiakasD. Peptidoglycan Contribution to the B Cell Superantigen Activity of Staphylococcal Protein a. mBio (2021) 12:1–13. doi: 10.1128/mBio.00039-21
104
Ulloa-MoralesAJGoodyearCSSilvermanGJ. Essential Domain-Dependent Roles Within Soluble IgG for In Vivo Superantigen Properties of Staphylococcal Protein A: Resolving the B-Cell Superantigen Paradox. Front Immunol (2018) 9:2011. doi: 10.3389/fimmu.2018.02011
105
HorstmannRDSievertsenHJKnoblochJFischettiVA. Antiphagocytic Activity of Streptococcal M Protein: Selective Binding of Complement Control Protein Factor H. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA (1988) 85:1657–61. doi: 10.1073/pnas.85.5.1657
106
KihlbergBMCollinMOlsenABjorckL. Protein H, an Antiphagocytic Surface Protein in Streptococcus Pyogenes. Infect Immun (1999) 67:1708–14. doi: 10.1128/IAI.67.4.1708-1714.1999
107
TuffsSWHaeryfarSMMMcCormickJK. Manipulation of Innate and Adaptive Immunity by Staphylococcal Superantigens. Pathogens (2018) 7:1–23. doi: 10.3390/pathogens7020053
108
PatellaVCasolaroVBjorckLMaroneGProteinL. A Bacterial Ig-Binding Protein That Activates Human Basophils and Mast Cells. J Immunol (1990) 145:3054–61.
109
GenoveseABouvetJPFlorioGLamparter-SchummertBBjorckLMaroneG. Bacterial Immunoglobulin Superantigen Proteins A and L Activate Human Heart Mast Cells by Interacting With Immunoglobulin E. Infect Immun (2000) 68:5517–24. doi: 10.1128/iai.68.10.5517-5524.2000
110
GenoveseABorgiaGBjorckLPetraroliAde PaulisAPiazzaMet al. Immunoglobulin Superantigen Protein L Induces IL-4 and IL-13 Secretion From Human Fc Epsilon RI+ Cells Through Interaction With the Kappa Light Chains of IgE. J Immunol (2003) 170:1854–61. doi: 10.4049/jimmunol.170.4.1854
111
PatelAHNowlanPWeaversEDFosterT. Virulence of Protein A-Deficient and Alpha-Toxin-Deficient Mutants of Staphylococcus Aureus Isolated by Allele Replacement. Infect Immun (1987) 55:3103–10. doi: 10.1128/IAI.55.12.3103-3110.1987
112
DerrickJPWigleyDB. Crystal Structure of a Streptococcal Protein G Domain Bound to an Fab Fragment. Nature (1992) 359:752–4. doi: 10.1038/359752a0
113
GrailleMSturaEACorperALSuttonBJTaussigMJCharbonnierJBet al. Crystal Structure of a Staphylococcus Aureus Protein A Domain Complexed With the Fab Fragment of a Human IgM Antibody: Structural Basis for Recognition of B-Cell Receptors and Superantigen Activity. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA (2000) 97:5399–404. doi: 10.1073/pnas.97.10.5399
114
NilsonBHSolomonABjorckLAkerstromB. Protein L From Peptostreptococcus Magnus Binds to the Kappa Light Chain Variable Domain. J Biol Chem (1992) 267:2234–9. doi: 10.1016/S0021-9258(18)45867-X
115
HousdenNGHarrisonSHousdenHRThomasKABeckinghamJARobertsSEet al. Observation and Characterization of the Interaction Between a Single Immunoglobulin Binding Domain of Protein L and Two Equivalents of Human Kappa Light Chains. J Biol Chem (2004) 279:9370–8. doi: 10.1074/jbc.M312938200
116
Domiati-SaadRLipskyPE. Staphylococcal Enterotoxin A Induces Survival of VH3-Expressing Human B Cells by Binding to the VH Region With Low Affinity. J Immunol (1998) 161:1257–66.
117
Domiati-SaadRAttrepJFBrezinschekHPCherrieAHKarpDRLipskyPE. Staphylococcal Enterotoxin D Functions as a Human B Cell Superantigen by Rescuing VH4-Expressing B Cells From Apoptosis. J Immunol (1996) 156:3608–20.
118
BunkerJJDreesCWatsonARPlunkettCHNaglerCRSchneewindOet al. B Cell Superantigens in the Human Intestinal Microbiota. Sci Transl Med (2019) 11:1–27. doi: 10.1126/scitranslmed.aau9356
119
JanssonBUhlenMNygrenPA. All Individual Domains of Staphylococcal Protein A Show Fab Binding. FEMS Immunol Med Microbiol (1998) 20:69–78. doi: 10.1111/j.1574-695X.1998.tb01112.x
120
DerrickJPMaidenMCFeaversIM. Crystal Structure of an Fab Fragment in Complex With a Meningococcal Serosubtype Antigen and a Protein G Domain. J Mol Biol (1999) 293:81–91. doi: 10.1006/jmbi.1999.3144
121
DerrickJPWigleyDB. The Third IgG-Binding Domain From Streptococcal Protein G. An Analysis by X-Ray Crystallography of the Structure Alone and in a Complex With Fab. J Mol Biol (1994) 243:906–18. doi: 10.1006/jmbi.1994.1691
122
GrailleMSturaEAHousdenNGBeckinghamJABottomleySPBealeDet al. Complex Between Peptostreptococcus Magnus Protein L and a Human Antibody Reveals Structural Convergence in the Interaction Modes of Fab Binding Proteins. Structure (2001) 9:679–87. doi: 10.1016/s0969-2126(01)00630-x
123
BeckinghamJAHousdenNGMuirNMBottomleySPGoreMG. Studies on a Single Immunoglobulin-Binding Domain of Protein L From Peptostreptococcus Magnus: The Role of Tyrosine-53 in the Reaction With Human IgG. Biochem J (2001) 353:395–401. doi: 10.1042/0264-6021:3530395
124
SvenssonHGWedemeyerWJEkstromJLCallenderDRKortemmeTKimDEet al. Contributions of Amino Acid Side Chains to the Kinetics and Thermodynamics of the Bivalent Binding of Protein L to Ig Kappa Light Chain. Biochemistry (2004) 43:2445–57. doi: 10.1021/bi034873s
125
SuCTLingWLLuaWHPohJJGanSK. The Role of Antibody Vkappa Framework 3 Region Towards Antigen Binding: Effects on Recombinant Production and Protein L Binding. Sci Rep (2017) 7:3766. doi: 10.1038/s41598-017-02756-3
126
LingWLLuaWHPohJJYeoJYLaneDPGanSK. Effect of VH-VL Families in Pertuzumab and Trastuzumab Recombinant Production, Her2 and FcgammaIIA Binding. Front Immunol (2018) 9:469. doi: 10.3389/fimmu.2018.00469
127
LingWLSuCTLuaWHPohJJNgYLWipatAet al. Essentially Leading Antibody Production: An Investigation of Amino Acids, Myeloma, and Natural V-Region Signal Peptides in Producing Pertuzumab and Trastuzumab Variants. Front Immunol (2020) 11:604318. doi: 10.3389/fimmu.2020.604318
128
SalvalaglioMZamoloLBusiniVMoscatelliDCavallottiC. Molecular Modeling of Protein A Affinity Chromatography. J Chromatogr A (2009) 1216:8678–86. doi: 10.1016/j.chroma.2009.04.035
129
KimHKChengAGKimHYMissiakasDMSchneewindO. Nontoxigenic Protein A Vaccine for Methicillin-Resistant Staphylococcus Aureus Infections in Mice. J Exp Med (2010) 207:1863–70. doi: 10.1084/jem.20092514
130
StoneGCSjobringUBjorckLSjoquistJBarberCVNardellaFA. The Fc Binding Site for Streptococcal Protein G Is in the C Gamma 2-C Gamma 3 Interface Region of IgG and is Related to the Sites That Bind Staphylococcal Protein A and Human Rheumatoid Factors. J Immunol (1989) 143:565–70.
131
KatoKLianLYBarsukovILDerrickJPKimHTanakaRet al. Model for the Complex Between Protein G and an Antibody Fc Fragment in Solution. Structure (1995) 3:79–85. doi: 10.1016/s0969-2126(01)00136-8
132
NoorenIMThorntonJM. Diversity of Protein-Protein Interactions. EMBO J (2003) 22:3486–92. doi: 10.1093/emboj/cdg359
133
ChinhW-HLSuTPohJ-JLingW-LYeoJYGanSK. Molecular Insights of Nickel Binding to Therapeutic Antibodies as a Possible New Antibody Superantigen. Front Immunol (2021) 12:1–11. doi: 10.3389/fimmu.2021.676048
134
GriloALMantalarisA. The Increasingly Human and Profitable Monoclonal Antibody Market. Trends Biotechnol (2019) 37:9–16. doi: 10.1016/j.tibtech.2018.05.014
135
KangwaMYelemaneVPonnurangamAFernandez-LahoreM. An Engineered Staphylococcal Protein A Based Ligand: Production, Characterization and Potential Application for the Capture of Immunoglobulin and Fc-Fusion Proteins. Protein Expr Purif (2019) 155:27–34. doi: 10.1016/j.pep.2018.11.003
136
InganasM. Comparison of Mechanisms of Interaction Between Protein A From Staphylococcus Aureus and Human Monoclonal IgG, IgA and IgM in Relation to the Classical FC Gamma and the Alternative F(Ab’)2 Epsilon Protein A Interactions. Scand J Immunol (1981) 13:343–52. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-3083.1981.tb00143.x
137
EyPLProwseSJJenkinCR. Isolation of Pure IgG1, IgG2a and IgG2b Immunoglobulins From Mouse Serum Using Protein A-Sepharose. Immunochemistry (1978) 15:429–36. doi: 10.1016/0161-5890(78)90070-6
138
NilssonBMoksTJanssonBAbrahmsenLElmbladAHolmgrenEet al. A Synthetic IgG-Binding Domain Based on Staphylococcal Protein a. Protein Eng (1987) 1:107–13. doi: 10.1093/protein/1.2.107
139
StarovasnikMAO’ConnellMPFairbrotherWJKelleyRF. Antibody Variable Region Binding by Staphylococcal Protein A: Thermodynamic Analysis and Location of the Fv Binding Site on E-Domain. Protein Sci (1999) 8:1423–31. doi: 10.1110/ps.8.7.1423
140
SeldonTAHughesKEMunsterDJChinDYJonesML. Improved Protein-A Separation of V(H)3 Fab From Fc After Papain Digestion of Antibodies. J Biomol Tech (2011) 22:50–2.
141
LinhultMGulichSGraslundTSimonAKarlssonMSjobergAet al. Improving the Tolerance of a Protein a Analogue to Repeated Alkaline Exposures Using a Bypass Mutagenesis Approach. Proteins (2004) 55:407–16. doi: 10.1002/prot.10616
142
MinakuchiKMurataDOkuboYNakanoYYoshidaS. Remarkable Alkaline Stability of an Engineered Protein A as Immunoglobulin Affinity Ligand: C Domain Having Only One Amino Acid Substitution. Protein Sci (2013) 22:1230–8. doi: 10.1002/pro.2310
143
XiaHFLiangZDWangSLWuPQJinXH. Molecular Modification of Protein A to Improve the Elution pH and Alkali Resistance in Affinity Chromatography. Appl Biochem Biotechnol (2014) 172:4002–12. doi: 10.1007/s12010-014-0818-1
144
GulichSLinhultMStahlSHoberS. Engineering Streptococcal Protein G for Increased Alkaline Stability. Protein Eng (2002) 15:835–42. doi: 10.1093/protein/15.10.835
145
PalmerBAngusKTaylorLWarwickerJDerrickJP. Design of Stability at Extreme Alkaline pH in Streptococcal Protein G. J Biotechnol (2008) 134:222–30. doi: 10.1016/j.jbiotec.2007.12.009
146
ImuraYTagawaTMiyamotoYNonoyamaSSumichikaHFujinoYet al. Washing With Alkaline Solutions in Protein A Purification Improves Physicochemical Properties of Monoclonal Antibodies. Sci Rep (2021) 11:1827. doi: 10.1038/s41598-021-81366-6
147
AkerstromBNilsonBHHoogenboomHRBjorckL. On the Interaction Between Single Chain Fv Antibodies and Bacterial Immunoglobulin-Binding Proteins. J Immunol Methods (1994) 177:151–63. doi: 10.1016/0022-1759(94)90152-x
148
NielsenKSmithPYuWNicolettiPElzerPViglioccoAet al. Enzyme Immunoassay for the Diagnosis of Brucellosis: Chimeric Protein A-Protein G as a Common Enzyme Labeled Detection Reagent for Sera for Different Animal Species. Vet Microbiol (2004) 101:123–9. doi: 10.1016/j.vetmic.2004.02.014
149
UrmannKReichPWalterJGBeckmannDSegalEScheperT. Rapid and Label-Free Detection of Protein a by Aptamer-Tethered Porous Silicon Nanostructures. J Biotechnol (2017) 257:171–7. doi: 10.1016/j.jbiotec.2017.01.005
150
YueHZhouYWangPWangXWangZWangLet al. A Facile Label-Free Electrochemiluminescent Biosensor for Specific Detection of Staphylococcus Aureus Utilizing the Binding Between Immunoglobulin G and Protein a. Talanta (2016) 153:401–6. doi: 10.1016/j.talanta.2016.03.043
151
LingWLNgYLWipatALaneDPGanSK. The Quantification of Antibody Elements and Receptors Subunit Expression Using qPCR: The Design of VH, VL, CH, CL, FcR Subunits Primers for a More Holistic View of the Immune System. J Immunol Methods (2020) 476:112683. doi: 10.1016/j.jim.2019.112683
152
NgKLiangWLiewAYeoY-HLuaJQianW-Het al. Republication – APD SpectBT: Arduino-Based Mobile Vis-Spectrophotometer. Sci Phone Apps Mobile Device (2019) 5:1–4. doi: 10.30943/2019/s23122019
153
PohJ-JGTanNGanSKen-EnS. Spectrophotometer on-the-Go: The Development of a 2-in-1 UV–Vis Portable Arduino-Based Spectrophotometer. Sensors Actuators A: Phys (2021) 325:1–8. doi: 10.1016/j.sna.2021.112698
154
Salgado-PabonWBreshearsLSpauldingARMerrimanJAStachCSHorswillARet al. Superantigens are Critical for Staphylococcus Aureus Infective Endocarditis, Sepsis, and Acute Kidney Injury. mBio (2013) 4:1–9. doi: 10.1128/mBio.00494-13
155
BashraheelSSAlQahtaniADRashidiFBAl-SulaitiHDomlingAOrieNNet al. Studies on Vascular Response to Full Superantigens and Superantigen Derived Peptides: Possible Production of Novel Superantigen Variants With Less Vasodilation Effect for Tolerable Cancer Immunotherapy. BioMed Pharmacother (2019) 115:108905. doi: 10.1016/j.biopha.2019.108905
156
YangYQianMYiSLiuSLiBYuRet al. Monoclonal Antibody Targeting Staphylococcus Aureus Surface Protein A (SasA) Protect Against Staphylococcus Aureus Sepsis and Peritonitis in Mice. PloS One (2016) 11:e0149460. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0149460
157
VarshneyAKKuzmichevaGALinJSunleyKMBowlingRAJrKwanTYet al. A Natural Human Monoclonal Antibody Targeting Staphylococcus Protein A Protects Against Staphylococcus Aureus Bacteremia. PloS One (2018) 13:e0190537. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0190537
158
ForsbergGOhlssonLBrodinTBjorkPLandoPAShawDet al. Therapy of Human Non-Small-Cell Lung Carcinoma Using Antibody Targeting of a Modified Superantigen. Br J Cancer (2001) 85:129–36. doi: 10.1054/bjoc.2001.1891
159
von ScheidtBWangMOliverAJChanJDJanaMKAliAIet al. Enterotoxins Can Support CAR T Cells Against Solid Tumors. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA (2019) 116:25229–35. doi: 10.1073/pnas.1904618116
160
LorenzoDDuarteAMundinanoJBerguerPNepomnaschyIPiazzonI. A B-Cell Superantigen Induces the Apoptosis of Murine and Human Malignant B Cells. PloS One (2016) 11:e0162456. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0162456
161
ChenJY. Superantigens, Superantigen-Like Proteins and Superantigen Derivatives for Cancer Treatment. Eur Rev Med Pharmacol Sci (2021) 25:1622–30. doi: 10.26355/eurrev_202102_24873
162
HeidaryMFMahmoodzadeh HosseiniHMehdizadeh AghdamENouraniMRRanjbarRMirnejadRet al. Overexpression of Metastatic Related MicroRNAs, Mir-335 and Mir-10b, by Staphylococcal Enterotoxin B in the Metastatic Breast Cancer Cell Line. Adv Pharm Bull (2015) 5:255–9. doi: 10.15171/apb.2015.035
163
Golob-UrbancARajcevicUStrmsekZJeralaR. Design of Split Superantigen Fusion Proteins for Cancer Immunotherapy. J Biol Chem (2019) 294:6294–305. doi: 10.1074/jbc.RA118.006742
164
HeYSunYRenYQiaoLGuoRDuJet al. The T Cell Activating Properties and Antitumour Activity of Staphylococcal Enterotoxin-Like Q. Med Microbiol Immunol (2019) 208:781–92. doi: 10.1007/s00430-019-00614-9
165
BrownMBhardwajN. Super(antigen) Target for SARS-CoV-2. Nat Rev Immunol (2021) 21:72. doi: 10.1038/s41577-021-00502-5
166
ChengMHZhangSPorrittRANoval RivasMPascholdLWillscherEet al. Superantigenic Character of an Insert Unique to SARS-CoV-2 Spike Supported by Skewed TCR Repertoire in Patients With Hyperinflammation. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA (2020) 117:25254–62. doi: 10.1073/pnas.2010722117
167
KouoTChaisawangwongW. SARS-CoV-2 as a Superantigen in Multisystem Inflammatory Syndrome in Children. J Clin Invest (2021) 131. doi: 10.1172/JCI149327
Summary
Keywords
superantigen, T-cell, B-cell, cytokine storm, interface, antibody purification
Citation
Deacy AM, Gan SK-E and Derrick JP (2021) Superantigen Recognition and Interactions: Functions, Mechanisms and Applications. Front. Immunol. 12:731845. doi: 10.3389/fimmu.2021.731845
Received
28 June 2021
Accepted
30 August 2021
Published
20 September 2021
Volume
12 - 2021
Edited by
Ester Boix, Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona, Spain
Reviewed by
Marco Pio La Manna, University of Palermo, Italy; Chozha V. Rathinam, University of Maryland, United States
Updates
Copyright
© 2021 Deacy, Gan and Derrick.
This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.
*Correspondence: Jeremy P. Derrick, jeremy.derrick@manchester.ac.uk; Samuel Ken-En Gan, samgan@apdskeg.com
This article was submitted to Microbial Immunology, a section of the journal Frontiers in Immunology
Disclaimer
All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article or claim that may be made by its manufacturer is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.