These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


BIOMARKERS

Molecular Biopsy of Human Tumors

- a resource for Precision Medicine *

115 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 14667231)

  • 1. Improving structure-based virtual screening by multivariate analysis of scoring data.
    Jacobsson M; Lidén P; Stjernschantz E; Boström H; Norinder U
    J Med Chem; 2003 Dec; 46(26):5781-9. PubMed ID: 14667231
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Evaluation of binary QSAR models derived from LUDI and MOE scoring functions for structure based virtual screening.
    Prathipati P; Saxena AK
    J Chem Inf Model; 2006; 46(1):39-51. PubMed ID: 16426038
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. An iterative knowledge-based scoring function to predict protein-ligand interactions: II. Validation of the scoring function.
    Huang SY; Zou X
    J Comput Chem; 2006 Nov; 27(15):1876-82. PubMed ID: 16983671
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Scaffold hopping through virtual screening using 2D and 3D similarity descriptors: ranking, voting, and consensus scoring.
    Zhang Q; Muegge I
    J Med Chem; 2006 Mar; 49(5):1536-48. PubMed ID: 16509572
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Consensus scoring with feature selection for structure-based virtual screening.
    Teramoto R; Fukunishi H
    J Chem Inf Model; 2008 Feb; 48(2):288-95. PubMed ID: 18229906
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Is it possible to increase hit rates in structure-based virtual screening by pharmacophore filtering? An investigation of the advantages and pitfalls of post-filtering.
    Muthas D; Sabnis YA; Lundborg M; Karlén A
    J Mol Graph Model; 2008 Jun; 26(8):1237-51. PubMed ID: 18203638
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Supervised scoring models with docked ligand conformations for structure-based virtual screening.
    Teramoto R; Fukunishi H
    J Chem Inf Model; 2007; 47(5):1858-67. PubMed ID: 17685604
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Virtual screening of biogenic amine-binding G-protein coupled receptors: comparative evaluation of protein- and ligand-based virtual screening protocols.
    Evers A; Hessler G; Matter H; Klabunde T
    J Med Chem; 2005 Aug; 48(17):5448-65. PubMed ID: 16107144
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Fast structure-based virtual ligand screening combining FRED, DOCK, and Surflex.
    Miteva MA; Lee WH; Montes MO; Villoutreix BO
    J Med Chem; 2005 Sep; 48(19):6012-22. PubMed ID: 16162004
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. SeleX-CS: a new consensus scoring algorithm for hit discovery and lead optimization.
    Bar-Haim S; Aharon A; Ben-Moshe T; Marantz Y; Senderowitz H
    J Chem Inf Model; 2009 Mar; 49(3):623-33. PubMed ID: 19231809
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Virtual screening with flexible docking and COMBINE-based models. Application to a series of factor Xa inhibitors.
    Murcia M; Ortiz AR
    J Med Chem; 2004 Feb; 47(4):805-20. PubMed ID: 14761183
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Ligand bias of scoring functions in structure-based virtual screening.
    Jacobsson M; Karlén A
    J Chem Inf Model; 2006; 46(3):1334-43. PubMed ID: 16711752
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Ligand-based virtual screening and in silico design of new antimalarial compounds using nonstochastic and stochastic total and atom-type quadratic maps.
    Marrero-Ponce Y; Iyarreta-Veitía M; Montero-Torres A; Romero-Zaldivar C; Brandt CA; Avila PE; Kirchgatter K; Machado Y
    J Chem Inf Model; 2005; 45(4):1082-100. PubMed ID: 16045304
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Considerations in compound database preparation--"hidden" impact on virtual screening results.
    Knox AJ; Meegan MJ; Carta G; Lloyd DG
    J Chem Inf Model; 2005; 45(6):1908-19. PubMed ID: 16309298
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Large-scale validation of a quantum mechanics based scoring function: predicting the binding affinity and the binding mode of a diverse set of protein-ligand complexes.
    Raha K; Merz KM
    J Med Chem; 2005 Jul; 48(14):4558-75. PubMed ID: 15999994
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Structure-based virtual screening with supervised consensus scoring: evaluation of pose prediction and enrichment factors.
    Teramoto R; Fukunishi H
    J Chem Inf Model; 2008 Apr; 48(4):747-54. PubMed ID: 18318474
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Virtual screening to enrich a compound collection with CDK2 inhibitors using docking, scoring, and composite scoring models.
    Cotesta S; Giordanetto F; Trosset JY; Crivori P; Kroemer RT; Stouten PF; Vulpetti A
    Proteins; 2005 Sep; 60(4):629-43. PubMed ID: 16028223
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Homology model-based virtual screening for GPCR ligands using docking and target-biased scoring.
    Radestock S; Weil T; Renner S
    J Chem Inf Model; 2008 May; 48(5):1104-17. PubMed ID: 18442221
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. A critical assessment of docking programs and scoring functions.
    Warren GL; Andrews CW; Capelli AM; Clarke B; LaLonde J; Lambert MH; Lindvall M; Nevins N; Semus SF; Senger S; Tedesco G; Wall ID; Woolven JM; Peishoff CE; Head MS
    J Med Chem; 2006 Oct; 49(20):5912-31. PubMed ID: 17004707
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Structure-based approach for the study of estrogen receptor binding affinity and subtype selectivity.
    Salum LB; Polikarpov I; Andricopulo AD
    J Chem Inf Model; 2008 Nov; 48(11):2243-53. PubMed ID: 18937440
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 6.