PT  - JOURNAL ARTICLE
AU  - Wing Ki Wong
AU  - Jinwoo Leem
AU  - Charlotte M. Deane
TI  - Comparative analysis of the CDR loops of antigen receptors
AID  - 10.1101/709840
DP  - 2019 Jan 01
TA  - bioRxiv
PG  - 709840
4099  - http://biorxiv.org/content/early/2019/07/22/709840.short
4100  - http://biorxiv.org/content/early/2019/07/22/709840.full
AB  - The adaptive immune system uses two main types of antigen receptors: T-cell receptors (TCRs) and antibodies. While both proteins share a globally similar β-sandwich architecture, TCRs are specialised to recognise peptide antigens in the binding groove of the major histocompatibility complex, while antibodies can bind an almost infinite range of molecules. For both proteins, the main determinants of target recognition are the complementarity-determining region (CDR) loops. Five of the six CDRs adopt a limited number of backbone conformations, known as the ‘canonical classes’; the remaining CDR (β3 in TCRs and H3 in antibodies) is more structurally diverse. In this paper, we first update the definition of canonical forms in TCRs, build an auto-updating sequence-based prediction tool (available at http://opig.stats.ox.ac.uk/resources) and demonstrate its application on large scale sequencing studies. Given the global similarity of TCRs and antibodies, we then examine the structural similarity of their CDRs. We find that TCR and antibody CDRs tend to have different length distributions, and where they have similar lengths, they mostly occupy distinct structural spaces. In the rare cases where we found structural similarity, the underlying sequence patterns for the TCR and antibody version are different. Finally, where multiple structures have been solved for the same CDR sequence, the structural variability in TCR loops is higher than that in antibodies, suggesting TCR CDRs are more flexible. These structural differences between TCR and antibody CDRs may be important to their different biological functions.