Advertisement

B Cells as MHC Restricted Antigen Presenting Cells: A Model for T-B Interaction

  • Howard M. Grey
  • Robert W. Chesnut

Abstract

There is considerable evidence to indicate that antigen-specific T helper cells and B cells recognize the same antigen in quite different ways. For instance, native and denatured forms of the same protein are highly cross-reactive antigens as recognized by helper and proliferating T cells, whereas they are completely noncrossreactive at the B cell level1–3, Furthermore, although B cells can readily be shown to bind conventional soluble antigens4, helper T cells cannot5,6; however, after antigen processing by syngeneic Ia-positive macrophages, antigen-dependent binding of helper T cells to macrophages has been demonstrated7,8. Data such as these have led to the postulation that B cells recognize intact, unprocessed antigen, whereas helper T cells recognize processed antigen presented in the context of macrophage Ia antigens. This postulation presents some difficulties for how T-B collaboration works, especially if antigen is important in bridging the 2 cells types as has been proposed in the hapten-carrier system first described by Mitchison9. A mechanism of T-B collaboration via antigen bridging has been postulated10 which involves the processing of antigen by antigen-specific B cells and subsequent presentation of the antigen, in the context of the B cell IA, to antigen-specific helper T cells.

Keywords

Accessory Cell Denature Form Relative Inefficiency Conventional Antigen Rabbit Gamma Globulin 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    R. W. Chesnut, R. O. Endres, and H. M. Grey. Antigen recognition by T cells and B cells: recognition of cross-reactivity between native and denatured forms of globular antigens. Clin. Immunol. Immunopathol. 15: 397. (1980).PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    V. Schirrmacher and H. Wigzell. Immune responses against native and chemically modified albumins in mice. I. Analysis of non-thymus-processing (B) and thyumus-processed (T) cell responses against methylated bovine serum albumin. J. Exp. Med. 136: 1616. (1972)PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    K. Ishizaka, H. Okudaira, and T. P. King. Immunogenic properties of modified antigen E. II. Ability of unrea-denatured antigen and polypeptide chain to prime T cells specific for antigen E. J. Immunol. 114: 110. (1975).PubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    H. Wigzell, K. G. Sundquist and T. O. Yoshida. Separation of cells according to surface antigens by the use of antibodycoated columns. Fractionation of cells carrying immunoglobulins and blood group antigen. Scand.J. Immunol. 1: 75. (1972).PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    A. Basten, J. F. A. P. Miller and R. Abraham. Relationship between Fc receptors, antigen-binding sites on T and B cells, and H-2 complex-associated determinants. J. Exp.Med. 141: 547. (1975).PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    J. P. Lamelin, B. Lisowska-Bernstein, A. Matter, J. E. Ryser and P. Vassalli. Mouse thymus-independent and thymus-derived lymphoid cells. J. Exp. Med. 136: 984. (1972).PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    P. E. Lipsky and A. S. Rosenthal. Macrophage-lymphocyte interaction. II. Antigen-mediated physical interactions between immune guinea pig lymph node lymphocytes and syngeneic macrophages. J. Exp. Med. 141: 138. (1975).PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    J. E. Swierkosz, K. Rock, P. Marrack and J. W. Kappler. The role of H-2-linked genes in helper T-cell function. II. Isolation on antigen-pulsed macrophages of two separate populations of F1 helper T cells each specific for antigen and one set of parental H-2 products. J. Exp. Med. 147: 554 (1978).PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    N. A. Mitchison. The carrier effect in the secondary response to hapten protein conjugates. II. Cell cooperation. Eur. J. Immunol. 1: 18. (1971).Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    B. Benacerraf. A hypothesis to relate the specificity of T lymphocytes and the activity of I region-specific Ir genes in macrophages and B lymphocytes. J. Immunol. 120: 1809 (1978).PubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    R. Chesnut and H. Grey. Studies on the capacity of B cells to serve as antigen presenting cells. J. Immunol. 126: 1075. (1981).PubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    E. Walker, N. Warner, R. Chesnut, J. Kappler and P. Marrack. Antigen specific, I-region restricted interactions in vitro between tumor cell lines and T cell hybridomas. J. Exp. Med. Submitted. (1981).Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    J. Kappler, B. Skidmore, J. White and P. Marrack. Antigeninducible, H-2 restricted, interleukin-2-producing T cell hybridomas. Lack of independent antigen and H-2 recognition. J. Exp. Med. 153: 1198. (1981).PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    J. Watson. Continuous proliferation of murine antigen specific helper T lymphocytes in culture. J. Exp. Med. 150: 1510. (1979).PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    R. Steinman and Z. Cohn. The interaction of soluble horseradish perozidase with mouse peritoneal macrophages in vitro. J. Cell Biol. 55: 186. (1971).CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Plenum Press, New York 1983

Authors and Affiliations

  • Howard M. Grey
    • 1
  • Robert W. Chesnut
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Medicine, National Jewish Hospital and Research Center/National Asthma Center and Departments of Pathology and MedicineUniversity of Colorado Health Sciences CenterDenverUSA

Personalised recommendations