Cited by 1,026vaccines and immunoinformatics approachesT-cell and B-cell ImmunologyImmunotherapy and Immune Responses

Identifying specificity groups in the T cell receptor repertoire

Open access
Glanville, Jacob, Huang, Huang, Nau, Allison, Hatton, Olivia, Wagar, Lisa E., Rubelt, Florian, Ji, Xuhuai, Han, Arnold +9 more·2017·Nature

Abstract

T cell receptor (TCR) sequences are very diverse, with many more possible sequence combinations than T cells in any one individual. Here we define the minimal requirements for TCR antigen specificity, through an analysis of TCR sequences using a panel of peptide and major histocompatibility complex (pMHC)-tetramer-sorted cells and structural data. From this analysis we developed an algorithm that we term GLIPH (grouping of lymphocyte interactions by paratope hotspots) to cluster TCRs with a high probability of sharing specificity owing to both conserved motifs and global similarity of complementarity-determining region 3 (CDR3) sequences. We show that GLIPH can reliably group TCRs of common specificity from different donors, and that conserved CDR3 motifs help to define the TCR clusters that are often contact points with the antigenic peptides. As an independent validation, we analysed 5,711 TCRβ chain sequences from reactive CD4 T cells from 22 individuals with latent Mycobacterium tuberculosis infection. We found 141 TCR specificity groups, including 16 distinct groups containing TCRs from multiple individuals. These TCR groups typically shared HLA alleles, allowing prediction of the likely HLA restriction, and a large number of M. tuberculosis T cell epitopes enabled us to identify pMHC ligands for all five of the groups tested. Mutagenesis and de novo TCR design confirmed that the GLIPH-identified motifs were critical and sufficient for shared-antigen recognition. Thus the GLIPH algorithm can analyse large numbers of TCR sequences and define TCR specificity groups shared by TCRs and individuals, which should greatly accelerate the analysis of T cell responses and expedite the identification of specific ligands.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1038/nature22976

Cites

23 of 23 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Glanville, J., Huang, H., Nau, A., Hatton, O., Wagar, L. E., Rubelt, F., Ji, X., Han, A., Krams, S. M., Pettus, C., Haas, N., Arlehamn, C. S. L., Sette, A., Boyd, S. D., Scriba, T. J., Martinez, O. M., & Davis, M. M.
Affiliations
  • Stanford Medicine (US)
  • University of San Francisco (US)
  • La Jolla Institute for Immunology (US)
  • University of Cape Town (ZA)
  • Howard Hughes Medical Institute (US)
Corresponding author
Davis, Mark M.
Venue
Nature
Published
2017-06-21
Volume
547
Issue
7661
Pages
94-98
ISSN
  • 0028-0836 (ISSN-L)
  • 1476-4687
OpenAlex
W2670890989
Cited by
1,026
References
23
Citations by year
2026: 95 · 2025: 117 · 2024: 130 · 2023: 133 · 2022: 104 · 2021: 133 · 2020: 108 · 2019: 101 · 2018: 77 · 2017: 28
FWCI
35.31
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Nature (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
  • RePEc: Research Papers in Economics (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • National Institutes of Health
  • National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (R37AI022511, U19AI057229, L30 AI113847)
  • National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases (K08DK100739, L30 DK089634)
  • National Center for Research Resources (S10RR025518)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › vaccines and immunoinformatics approaches
  • Life Sciences › Immunology and Microbiology › Immunology › T-cell and B-cell Immunology
  • Life Sciences › Immunology and Microbiology › Immunology › Immunotherapy and Immune Responses
Keywords
T cell receptor repertoire, TCR specificity, HLA restriction, CDR3 motifs, TCR clustering, latent tuberculosis infection, epitope prediction, CD4+ T cells
MeSH terms
Adolescent, Algorithms, Amino Acid Sequence, HLA Antigens, Humans, Ligands, Models, Molecular, Mycobacterium tuberculosis, Receptors, Antigen, T-Cell, Substrate Specificity, Crystallography, X-Ray, Epitopes, T-Lymphocyte

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review