| Literature DB >> 19225461 |
Muriel C Schneider1, Beverly E Prosser, Joseph J E Caesar, Elisabeth Kugelberg, Su Li, Qian Zhang, Sadik Quoraishi, Janet E Lovett, Janet E Deane, Robert B Sim, Pietro Roversi, Steven Johnson, Christoph M Tang, Susan M Lea.
Abstract
The complement system is an essential component of the innate and acquired immune system, and consists of a series of proteolytic cascades that are initiated by the presence of microorganisms. In health, activation of complement is precisely controlled through membrane-bound and soluble plasma-regulatory proteins including complement factor H (fH; ref. 2), a 155 kDa protein composed of 20 domains (termed complement control protein repeats). Many pathogens have evolved the ability to avoid immune-killing by recruiting host complement regulators and several pathogens have adapted to avoid complement-mediated killing by sequestering fH to their surface. Here we present the structure of a complement regulator in complex with its pathogen surface-protein ligand. This reveals how the important human pathogen Neisseria meningitidis subverts immune responses by mimicking the host, using protein instead of charged-carbohydrate chemistry to recruit the host complement regulator, fH. The structure also indicates the molecular basis of the host-specificity of the interaction between fH and the meningococcus, and informs attempts to develop novel therapeutics and vaccines.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2009 PMID: 19225461 PMCID: PMC2670278 DOI: 10.1038/nature07769
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Nature ISSN: 0028-0836 Impact factor: 49.962
Figure 1The fHbp binding site is localised to CCP6 of fH and requires the complete extracellular portion of fHbp
(a) Far Western analysis of fH binding to intact fHbp and truncated versions (as indicated). Membranes were incubated with purified fH which was detected with α-fH pAbs. Binding was only observed to the intact 27 kDa fHbp (shown with an arrow). (b) FACS analysis with α-fH pAbs detected binding between N. meningitidis and fH constructs (all of the His form) containing CCPs 6 & 7 (note that where binding is seen the relative magnitude of the response is not significant since the amount of pAb bound is approximately proportional to the size of the fH construct rather than the tightness of the binding event) and (c) SPR demonstrates that fHbp is only able to bind fH constructs containing CCPs 6 and 7 (the number of molecules of the fH fragments coupled on the sensor channels is in the ratio 1:1:1:3 for fh78:fh567:fh678:fh67, respectively). Signals shown are after subtraction of a control trace from a mock-coupled channel. With the experiment reversed the inset shows a 1:1 Langmuir fit (black lines) to a series of fH678 dilutions (coloured lines) injected over a fHbp surface to determine kinetic parameters (Fig. 1e & Tab. S1). (d) FACS competition studies (using an α-fH mAb directed against CCP5 (MRC OX2428) and therefore unable to recognize the fH67 construct) show that the short fH67 construct (between 0.3 and 33 μM) can compete away binding of full length fH demonstrating that this construct contains the entire fHbp binding site. Values shown are percentage of fluorescence positive cells in a population from three experiments ± s.d. The gate value was set using a control with no fH added. (e) Quantitation with SPR confirms that the presence of CCPs 6 and 7 is necessary and sufficient for high affinity binding to fHbp and that the common fH polymorphism in CCP7 (402His/Tyr) does not significantly alter the affinity of fHbp binding.
Figure 2Structure of fHbp and its complex with fH67
(a) Two views of a cartoon representation of fHbp (residues 80 to 320). The cartoon is coloured according to the regions previously used to study fHbp (“A” region yellow, “B” region green, “C” region cyan) illustrating the way in which these constructs do not reflect the overall architecture. (b) Cartoon of the fHbp:fH67 complex with fHbp coloured as in (a) and fh67 in dark blue. Side chains from both proteins involved in forming salt bridges across the interaction surface are shown in red as ball-and-stick representations (zoomed and reoriented in inset box). (c) Topology of fHbp and fh67 coloured as in (b) with the number of the residues involved in either H-bond or salt-bridge interactions between the proteins highlighted in red. The numbering scheme used throughout is as per Uniprot sequence Q9JXV4. This scheme is offset by +164 from the numbering used for the earlier NMR structure11 (which was numbered from the start of their fragment) and by −65 from the scheme used in Masignani et al.10 where numbering started from residue 1 of the mature protein without the signal sequence.
Figure 3Interference with fHbp binding of fH
(a) Site-directed mutagenesis to use Ala to substitute charged side-chains, shown by the structure to be involved in complex-formation, abolishes binding to the wild-type form of their partner at concentrations around the wild-type KD. The black bar indicates the time period for which the fH analytes were injected (at 50 nM, 40 μl.min−1) over the fHbp surfaces.(b) Overlay of the fH-bound SOS (in gold as ball-and-stick and semi-transparent surface) from the structure of fH678 in complex with SOS21 onto our fHbp:fH67 structure (coloured as in 2b). This demonstrates that the sites of SOS and fHbp binding overlap, suggesting that SOS could inhibit the interaction. (c) Mimicry of GAG binding to fH via sulphate interactions (LH panel, SOS – green carbons, fH – grey carbons) by charged side chain (Glu 304) of fHbp (RH panel, fHbp – cyan carbons, fH – grey carbons). (d) SPR demonstrates that SOS inhibits binding of fHbp to fH in the mM concentration range (fH678 injected at 4nM, 40μl/min in presence of varying amounts of SOS) Values +/− one SD, n=3. (e) Mapping of sites of amino acid differences in CCP6 of fH between human (UniProt P08603) and rhesus macaque (UniProt O19279). Residues which are altered shown in pink, space filling representation, with fHbp and fh67 shown as in panel (2b).