Inhibition of human T‐cell responses by allergen peptides

Of the many significant advances in the field of immunology that have occurred in the last 30 years arguably the most important, at least from a T-cell biologists point of view, has been the definition of major histocompatibility complex (MHC) restriction1 and the crystal structure of human leucocyte antigen (HLA) molecules.2–4 These demonstrations have enabled detailed study of the way in which T cells recognize antigen and also how this process differs from that in B cells. With a few notable exceptions, production of specific immunoglobulin by B cells is T-cell dependent. Furthermore, recruitment of non-lymphoid effector cells into areas of inflammation is a process largely marshalled by the T lymphocyte. It follows therefore that inhibition of T-cell function may have beneficial outcomes in situations in which detrimental immune responses occur and give rise to pathology. Suppression of T-cell function has been achieved with the use of pharmacological agents, such as glucocorticosteroids and cyclosporin, and more recently with biological agents, such as monoclonal antibodies directed against CD3 and CD4. Whilst achieving the desired aim of immunosuppression, these approaches suffer from serious weaknesses, the most obvious of which is a lack of specificity for the antigen(s) which drive the inflammatory process. The same may be said to be true of other therapeutic approaches currently being developed which aim to neutralize the effects of individual mediators in the inflammatory cascade. Here, a notable success has been the use of monoclonal antibodies to tumour necrosis factor (TNF) to treat patients with rheumatoid arthritis.5 However, the long-term consequences of removing individual mediators remain to be seen. Of concern is the recent report of subjects receiving anti-TNF therapy developing a lupus-like syndrome thought to be a direct result of the therapy itself.6 The challenge of introducing specificity into strategies aimed at modulating T-cell responses is one that has been met with considerable success in animal models by the use of peptide epitopes from the antigen in question. Peptide-induced tolerance has been demonstrated in models of experimental autoimmune encephalomyelitis (EAE),7,8 collagen-induced arthritis9 and, more recently, in models of allergic disease. Briner and colleagues sensitized mice to the cat allergen Fel d I and subsequently demonstrated the ability of allergen-derived peptides to inhibit T-cell cytokine and antibody production.10 Hoyne and colleagues demonstrated the ability of peptides from the house dust mite allergen Der p II to down-regulate T-cell and antibody responses to challenge with intact protein and also to prevent sensitization by prior administration.11,12 Bauer administered a dominant T-cell epitope of Bet v I to CBA/J mice either prior to or following sensitization with the whole allergen. No change in antibody isotype was observed but T-cell proliferative responses were inhibited by both treatments.13 More recently, mice sensitized to bee venom allergen phospholipase A2 (PLA2), were treated by intranasal administration of a mixture of three long peptides spanning the entire molecule. A marked reduction in specific immunoglobulin E (IgE) was observed coupled with a decreased interleukin-4 (IL-4) to interferon-γ (IFN-γ) ratio. Pre-administration of peptide resulted in a failure to develop IgE sensitization to subsequent immunization with the whole molecule.14 In addition to animal models, the ability of high-dose peptides to modulate human T-cell responses has also been demonstrated. In vitro studies with human T cells were performed by Lamb and colleagues, who demonstrated the induction of antigen-specific non-responsiveness following the incubation of T-cell clones with supraoptimal doses of specific ligand in the absence of professional antigen-presenting cells.15 Collectively, these studies provided a logical basis for the translation of a peptide-based therapeutic approach in man.