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 *

589 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 16279792)

  • 21. Predictive QSAR modeling of HIV reverse transcriptase inhibitor TIBO derivatives.
    Mandal AS; Roy K
    Eur J Med Chem; 2009 Apr; 44(4):1509-24. PubMed ID: 18760864
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 22. 3D QSAR comparative molecular field analysis on nonsteroidal farnesoid X receptor activators.
    Honório KM; Garratt RC; Polikarpov I; Andricopulo AD
    J Mol Graph Model; 2007 Mar; 25(6):921-7. PubMed ID: 17055759
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 23. Structural and chemical basis for enhanced affinity and potency for a large series of estrogen receptor ligands: 2D and 3D QSAR studies.
    Salum Lde B; Polikarpov I; Andricopulo AD
    J Mol Graph Model; 2007 Sep; 26(2):434-42. PubMed ID: 17349808
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 24. Combinatorial QSAR modeling of P-glycoprotein substrates.
    de Cerqueira Lima P; Golbraikh A; Oloff S; Xiao Y; Tropsha A
    J Chem Inf Model; 2006; 46(3):1245-54. PubMed ID: 16711744
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 25. QSAR study of a large set of 3-pyridyl ethers as ligands of the alpha4beta2 nicotinic acetylcholine receptor.
    Zhang H; Li H; Ma Q
    J Mol Graph Model; 2007 Jul; 26(1):226-35. PubMed ID: 17208024
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 26. Insight into the structural requirements of urokinase-type plasminogen activator inhibitors based on 3D QSAR CoMFA/CoMSIA models.
    Bhongade BA; Gadad AK
    J Med Chem; 2006 Jan; 49(2):475-89. PubMed ID: 16420035
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 27. Does rational selection of training and test sets improve the outcome of QSAR modeling?
    Martin TM; Harten P; Young DM; Muratov EN; Golbraikh A; Zhu H; Tropsha A
    J Chem Inf Model; 2012 Oct; 52(10):2570-8. PubMed ID: 23030316
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 28. Conformational analysis of D1 dopamine receptor agonists: pharmacophore assessment and receptor mapping.
    Mottola DM; Laiter S; Watts VJ; Tropsha A; Wyrick SD; Nichols DE; Mailman RB
    J Med Chem; 1996 Jan; 39(1):285-96. PubMed ID: 8568818
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 29. Computational study of histamine H3-receptor antagonist with support vector machines and three dimension quantitative structure activity relationship methods.
    Chen HF
    Anal Chim Acta; 2008 Aug; 624(2):203-9. PubMed ID: 18706326
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 30. Development and validation of k-nearest-neighbor QSPR models of metabolic stability of drug candidates.
    Shen M; Xiao Y; Golbraikh A; Gombar VK; Tropsha A
    J Med Chem; 2003 Jul; 46(14):3013-20. PubMed ID: 12825940
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 31. Prospective validation of a comprehensive in silico hERG model and its applications to commercial compound and drug databases.
    Doddareddy MR; Klaasse EC; Shagufta ; Ijzerman AP; Bender A
    ChemMedChem; 2010 May; 5(5):716-29. PubMed ID: 20349498
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 32. Molecule kernels: a descriptor- and alignment-free quantitative structure-activity relationship approach.
    Mohr JA; Jain BJ; Obermayer K
    J Chem Inf Model; 2008 Sep; 48(9):1868-81. PubMed ID: 18767832
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 33. 3D-QSAR study of ring-substituted quinoline class of anti-tuberculosis agents.
    Nayyar A; Malde A; Jain R; Coutinho E
    Bioorg Med Chem; 2006 Feb; 14(3):847-56. PubMed ID: 16214351
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 34. Random or rational design? Evaluation of diverse compound subsets from chemical structure databases.
    Pötter T; Matter H
    J Med Chem; 1998 Feb; 41(4):478-88. PubMed ID: 9484498
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 35. QSAR models for the human H(+)/peptide symporter, hPEPT1: affinity prediction using alignment-independent descriptors.
    Larsen SB; Jørgensen FS; Olsen L
    J Chem Inf Model; 2008 Jan; 48(1):233-41. PubMed ID: 18092768
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 36. Comparative molecular field analysis-based prediction of drug affinities at recombinant D1A dopamine receptors.
    Brusniak MY; Pearlman RS; Neve KA; Wilcox RE
    J Med Chem; 1996 Feb; 39(4):850-9. PubMed ID: 8632409
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 37. Hologram quantitative structure activity relationship studies on 5-HT6 antagonists.
    Doddareddy MR; Lee YJ; Cho YS; Choi KI; Koh HY; Pae AN
    Bioorg Med Chem; 2004 Jul; 12(14):3815-24. PubMed ID: 15210148
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 38. Three new consensus QSAR models for the prediction of Ames genotoxicity.
    Votano JR; Parham M; Hall LH; Kier LB; Oloff S; Tropsha A; Xie Q; Tong W
    Mutagenesis; 2004 Sep; 19(5):365-77. PubMed ID: 15388809
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 39. Antitumor agents. 213. Modeling of epipodophyllotoxin derivatives using variable selection k nearest neighbor QSAR method.
    Xiao Z; Xiao YD; Feng J; Golbraikh A; Tropsha A; Lee KH
    J Med Chem; 2002 May; 45(11):2294-309. PubMed ID: 12014968
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 40. Ligand-based pharmacophore model of N-Aryl and N-Heteroaryl piperazine alpha 1A-adrenoceptors antagonists using GALAHAD.
    Zhao X; Yuan M; Huang B; Ji H; Zhu L
    J Mol Graph Model; 2010 Sep; 29(2):126-36. PubMed ID: 20538497
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Previous]   [Next]    [New Search]
    of 30.