196 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 16376595)
21. 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]
22. Ranking targets in structure-based virtual screening of three-dimensional protein libraries: methods and problems.
Kellenberger E; Foata N; Rognan D
J Chem Inf Model; 2008 May; 48(5):1014-25. PubMed ID: 18412328
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
23. Ligand-target interaction-based weighting of substructures for virtual screening.
Crisman TJ; Sisay MT; Bajorath J
J Chem Inf Model; 2008 Oct; 48(10):1955-64. PubMed ID: 18821751
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
24. Selection of in silico drug screening results for G-protein-coupled receptors by using universal active probes.
Wada M; Kanamori E; Nakamura H; Fukunishi Y
J Chem Inf Model; 2011 Sep; 51(9):2398-407. PubMed ID: 21848279
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
25. 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]
26. Novel method for generating structure-based pharmacophores using energetic analysis.
Salam NK; Nuti R; Sherman W
J Chem Inf Model; 2009 Oct; 49(10):2356-68. PubMed ID: 19761201
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
27. Investigation of MM-PBSA rescoring of docking poses.
Thompson DC; Humblet C; Joseph-McCarthy D
J Chem Inf Model; 2008 May; 48(5):1081-91. PubMed ID: 18465849
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
28. Impact of scoring functions on enrichment in docking-based virtual screening: an application study on renin inhibitors.
Krovat EM; Langer T
J Chem Inf Comput Sci; 2004; 44(3):1123-9. PubMed ID: 15154781
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
29. Discovery of small molecule inhibitors of integrin alphavbeta3 through structure-based virtual screening.
Zhou Y; Peng H; Ji Q; Qi J; Zhu Z; Yang C
Bioorg Med Chem Lett; 2006 Nov; 16(22):5878-82. PubMed ID: 16982193
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
30. Role of binding entropy in the refinement of protein-ligand docking predictions: analysis based on the use of 11 scoring functions.
Ruvinsky AM
J Comput Chem; 2007 Jun; 28(8):1364-72. PubMed ID: 17342720
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
31. 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]
32. Supervised consensus scoring for docking and virtual screening.
Teramoto R; Fukunishi H
J Chem Inf Model; 2007; 47(2):526-34. PubMed ID: 17295466
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
33. PSI-DOCK: towards highly efficient and accurate flexible ligand docking.
Pei J; Wang Q; Liu Z; Li Q; Yang K; Lai L
Proteins; 2006 Mar; 62(4):934-46. PubMed ID: 16395666
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
34. A general technique to rank protein-ligand binding affinities and determine allosteric versus direct binding site competition in compound mixtures.
Annis DA; Nazef N; Chuang CC; Scott MP; Nash HM
J Am Chem Soc; 2004 Dec; 126(47):15495-503. PubMed ID: 15563178
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
35. Comparative assessment of scoring functions on a diverse test set.
Cheng T; Li X; Li Y; Liu Z; Wang R
J Chem Inf Model; 2009 Apr; 49(4):1079-93. PubMed ID: 19358517
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
36. Alternative global goodness metrics and sensitivity analysis: heuristics to check the robustness of conclusions from studies comparing virtual screening methods.
Sheridan RP
J Chem Inf Model; 2008 Feb; 48(2):426-33. PubMed ID: 18247505
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
37. Enhanced virtual screening by combined use of two docking methods: getting the most on a limited budget.
Maiorov V; Sheridan RP
J Chem Inf Model; 2005; 45(4):1017-23. PubMed ID: 16045296
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
38. Glide: a new approach for rapid, accurate docking and scoring. 2. Enrichment factors in database screening.
Halgren TA; Murphy RB; Friesner RA; Beard HS; Frye LL; Pollard WT; Banks JL
J Med Chem; 2004 Mar; 47(7):1750-9. PubMed ID: 15027866
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
39. LigMatch: a multiple structure-based ligand matching method for 3D virtual screening.
Kinnings SL; Jackson RM
J Chem Inf Model; 2009 Sep; 49(9):2056-66. PubMed ID: 19685924
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
40. Interpretation of scoring functions using 3D molecular fields. Mapping the diacyl-hydrazine-binding pocket of an insect ecdysone receptor.
Bordas B; Belai I; Lopata A; Szanto Z
J Chem Inf Model; 2007; 47(1):176-85. PubMed ID: 17238263
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Previous] [Next] [New Search]
