CDB20:0002644 CD274 — CD80

ABSTRACT: Numerous studies have pointed to the role of programmed death-1 ligand 1 (PD-L1) in regulating tolerance, chronic infection, and tumor immunity. Recently, we have identified murine B7-1 as a new binding partner for murine PD-L1. Human and mouse B7-1 share only 46% identity, leading us to question whether human B7-1 and PD-L1 can participate in a similar interaction. Here we show that human B7-1 can interact with human PD-L1 with affinity greater than that of B7-1 with CD28, but less than that of B7-1 with CTLA-4 or of PD-L1 with PD-1. We characterize a series of anti-human PD-L1 monoclonal antibodies and identify antibodies that can block interactions of PD-L1 with B7-1, PD-1, or both. Since PD-L1 and CD28 on T cells may compete for B7-1 as a binding partner and CD8 T cells may express high or low levels of CD28, we examined when PD-L1 and CD28 are co-expressed on CD8 T cells. We compared the time-course and extent of PD-L1 induction on CD8 CD28high versus CD28low T cells following stimulation with anti-CD3. We show that PD-L1 is induced to a higher level on CD28high T cells than on CD28low T cells upon activation. These results suggest that PD-L1 may play an important and undervalued role on human T cells.

ABSTRACT: The programmed death-1 (PD-1) molecule is involved in peripheral tolerance and in the immune escape mechanisms during chronic viral infections and cancer. PD-1 interacts with two ligands, PD-L1 and PD-L2. We have investigated the molecular mechanisms of PD-1 interactions with its ligands by surface plasmon resonance and cell surface binding as well as the ability of the two ligands to compete for PD-1 binding. PD-L1 and PD-L2 bound PD-1 with comparable affinities, but striking differences were observed at the level of the association and dissociation characteristics. PD-L1, but not PD-L2, had a delayed interaction reminiscent of a phenomenon of conformational transition. These mechanisms were confirmed by using PD-L1 mAbs that delayed the dissociation of PD-L1 from PD-1. This mechanism was not restricted to PD-1 binding since PD-L1 behaved in a similar manner with its second ligand, CD80. Finally, we could demonstrate that PD-L1 and PD-L2 competed for PD-1 binding and conversely, an antagonist PD-1 mAb blocked both PD-L1 and PD-L2 binding to PD-1 and strongly enhanced T-cell proliferation. These data further emphasize the differential molecular mechanisms of interaction of PD-L1 and PD-L2 with PD-1, and suggest possible new approach for the therapy of chronic infection, cancer and transplantation.

ABSTRACT: PD-L1 has two receptors: PD-1 and CD80. Previous reports assumed that PD-L1 and CD80 interacted in trans, but recent reports showed that only cis PD-L1/CD80 interactions existed, and prevention of cis PD-L1/CD80 interactions on antigen-presenting cells (APCs) reduced antitumor immunity via augmenting PD-L1/PD-1 and CD80/CTLA4 interactions between T and APCs. Here, using tumor-bearing mice capable of cis and trans or trans only PD-L1/CD80 interactions, we show that trans PD-L1/CD80 interactions do exist between tumor and T cells, and the effects of trans PD-L1/CD80 interactions require tumor cell expression of MHC-I and T cell expression of CD28. The blockade of PD-L1/CD80 interactions in mice with both cis and trans interactions or with only trans interactions augments antitumor immunity by expanding IFN-γ-producing CD8+ T cells and IFN-γ-dependent NOS2-expressing tumor-associated macrophages. Our studies indicate that although cis and trans PD-L1/CD80 interactions may have opposite effects on antitumor immunity, the net effect of blocking PD-L1/CD80 interactions in vivo augments CD8+ T cell-mediated antitumor immunity.