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 *

145 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 15729852)

  • 1. Measuring CAMD technique performance: a virtual screening case study in the design of validation experiments.
    Good AC; Hermsmeier MA; Hindle SA
    J Comput Aided Mol Des; 2004; 18(7-9):529-36. PubMed ID: 15729852
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Descriptors you can count on? Normalized and filtered pharmacophore descriptors for virtual screening.
    Good AC; Cho SJ; Mason JS
    J Comput Aided Mol Des; 2004; 18(7-9):523-7. PubMed ID: 15729851
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Optimization of CAMD techniques 3. Virtual screening enrichment studies: a help or hindrance in tool selection?
    Good AC; Oprea TI
    J Comput Aided Mol Des; 2008; 22(3-4):169-78. PubMed ID: 18188508
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Measuring CAMD technique performance. 2. How "druglike" are drugs? Implications of Random test set selection exemplified using druglikeness classification models.
    Good AC; Hermsmeier MA
    J Chem Inf Model; 2007; 47(1):110-4. PubMed ID: 17238255
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. LigMate: A Multifeature Integration Algorithm for Ligand-Similarity-Based Virtual Screening.
    Grimm M; Liu Y; Yang X; Bu C; Xiao Z; Cao Y
    J Chem Inf Model; 2020 Dec; 60(12):6044-6053. PubMed ID: 33190499
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Comparison of topological descriptors for similarity-based virtual screening using multiple bioactive reference structures.
    Hert J; Willett P; Wilton DJ; Acklin P; Azzaoui K; Jacoby E; Schuffenhauer A
    Org Biomol Chem; 2004 Nov; 2(22):3256-66. PubMed ID: 15534703
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Mapping algorithms for molecular similarity analysis and ligand-based virtual screening: design of DynaMAD and comparison with MAD and DMC.
    Eckert H; Vogt I; Bajorath J
    J Chem Inf Model; 2006; 46(4):1623-34. PubMed ID: 16859294
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. 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]  

  • 9. Toward novel universal descriptors: charge fingerprints.
    Burden FR; Polley MJ; Winkler DA
    J Chem Inf Model; 2009 Mar; 49(3):710-5. PubMed ID: 19434903
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Flexsim-R: a virtual affinity fingerprint descriptor to calculate similarities of functional groups.
    Weber A; Teckentrup A; Briem H
    J Comput Aided Mol Des; 2002 Dec; 16(12):903-16. PubMed ID: 12825622
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Analysis and optimization of structure-based virtual screening protocols. 2. Examination of docked ligand orientation sampling methodology: mapping a pharmacophore for success.
    Good AC; Cheney DL; Sitkoff DF; Tokarski JS; Stouch TR; Bassolino DA; Krystek SR; Li Y; Mason JS; Perkins TD
    J Mol Graph Model; 2003 Sep; 22(1):31-40. PubMed ID: 12798389
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Design and evaluation of a novel class-directed 2D fingerprint to search for structurally diverse active compounds.
    Eckert H; Bajorath J
    J Chem Inf Model; 2006; 46(6):2515-26. PubMed ID: 17125192
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Editorial: Current status and perspective on drug targets in tubercle bacilli and drug design of antituberculous agents based on structure-activity relationship.
    Tomioka H
    Curr Pharm Des; 2014; 20(27):4305-6. PubMed ID: 24245755
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. 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]  

  • 15. Evaluation of the performance of 3D virtual screening protocols: RMSD comparisons, enrichment assessments, and decoy selection--what can we learn from earlier mistakes?
    Kirchmair J; Markt P; Distinto S; Wolber G; Langer T
    J Comput Aided Mol Des; 2008; 22(3-4):213-28. PubMed ID: 18196462
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Predictive QSAR modeling workflow, model applicability domains, and virtual screening.
    Tropsha A; Golbraikh A
    Curr Pharm Des; 2007; 13(34):3494-504. PubMed ID: 18220786
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Toward a benchmarking data set able to evaluate ligand- and structure-based virtual screening using public HTS data.
    Lindh M; Svensson F; Schaal W; Zhang J; Sköld C; Brandt P; Karlén A
    J Chem Inf Model; 2015 Feb; 55(2):343-53. PubMed ID: 25564966
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Free resources to assist structure-based virtual ligand screening experiments.
    Villoutreix BO; Renault N; Lagorce D; Sperandio O; Montes M; Miteva MA
    Curr Protein Pept Sci; 2007 Aug; 8(4):381-411. PubMed ID: 17696871
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Consensus scoring criteria for improving enrichment in virtual screening.
    Yang JM; Chen YF; Shen TW; Kristal BS; Hsu DF
    J Chem Inf Model; 2005; 45(4):1134-46. PubMed ID: 16045308
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Combinatorial QSAR of ambergris fragrance compounds.
    Kovatcheva A; Golbraikh A; Oloff S; Xiao YD; Zheng W; Wolschann P; Buchbauer G; Tropsha A
    J Chem Inf Comput Sci; 2004; 44(2):582-95. PubMed ID: 15032539
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 8.