5A–E). Because CD8 alone had a negligible binding propensity to pMHC compared to any of these TCRs, the increased /mpMHC at the second stage can only be explained by cooperation or synergy between TCR and CD8 for pMHC binding, or cooperative TCR–pMHC–CD8 trimolecular interaction. We quantify this synergy using Δ(/mpMHC), the difference between the normalized adhesion bonds of the dual-receptor 3-MA nmr curve and the sum of the normalized adhesion
bonds of the two single-receptor curves. The synergy indices Δ(/mpMHC) were zero at contact times smaller than the transition point (∼1 s). Beyond the transition from the first to the second stage, the values (at 2 s contact time) for the TCR panel are shown in Figure 6A together with the /mpMHC values for the two TCR–pMHC and pMHC–CD8 bimolecular interactions. These data show that the cooperative TCR–pMHC–CD8 trimolecular interaction dominates the dual-receptor learn more interaction in the second stage. The exception in the preceding paragraph is W2C8, the TCR with lowest affinity for gp209–2M:HLA-A2, even lower than that of CD8. Its binding curve measured with the TCR+CD8+ cells shows a single plateau instead of the two-stage
pattern (Supporting Information Fig. 5F) with the /mpMHC values indistinguishable from those for the pMHC–CD8 bimolecular interaction but much higher than those for the TCR–pMHC bimolecular interaction (Fig. 5F). The affinity calculated from the plateau
Pa agrees with the CD8–pMHC affinity measured using TCR−CD8+ cells but is much higher than the TCR–pMHC affinity measured using TCR+CD8− cells, indicating the dominant CD8 contribution to binding of these TCR+CD8+ cells to RBCs bearing gp209–2M:HLA-A2 (Supporting Information Fig. 5G). Because of the lack of TCR–pMHC binding, the synergy index is negligibly small for the W2C8 TCR (Fig. 6A). Similar to our previous finding , the synergy index Δ(/mpMHC) increased with the 2D affinity for the TCR–pMHC interaction (Fig. 6B). Indeed, the linear regression Farnesyltransferase of the Δ(/mpMHC) versus AcKa log-log plot resulted in an R2 = 0.98 (p = 0.0001), showing a strong correlation between these parameters. Having characterized the 2D interactions on hybridoma cells, we next determined the correlation of the 2D kinetic parameters with T-cell function to evaluate whether 2D parameters perform better than their 3D counterparts. The 2D kinetic parameters (affinity, on-rate, off-rate, and /mpMHC; Fig. 7) all showed better correlation with IL-2 secretion than 3D parameters (Fig. 2A and D and Supporting Information Fig. 1B and F and Table 1). Importantly, affinity, on-rate, and /mpMHC all had statistically significant correlation with IL-2 secretion (p values < 0.05) while none of the 3D parameters did.