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 *

130 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 16426063)

  • 1. The use of consensus scoring in ligand-based virtual screening.
    Baber JC; Shirley WA; Gao Y; Feher M
    J Chem Inf Model; 2006; 46(1):277-88. PubMed ID: 16426063
    [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. 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]  

  • 4. Testing assumptions and hypotheses for rescoring success in protein-ligand docking.
    O'Boyle NM; Liebeschuetz JW; Cole JC
    J Chem Inf Model; 2009 Aug; 49(8):1871-8. PubMed ID: 19645429
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. 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]  

  • 6. How similar are similarity searching methods? A principal component analysis of molecular descriptor space.
    Bender A; Jenkins JL; Scheiber J; Sukuru SC; Glick M; Davies JW
    J Chem Inf Model; 2009 Jan; 49(1):108-19. PubMed ID: 19123924
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. 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]  

  • 8. 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]  

  • 9. FURSMASA: a new approach to rapid scoring functions that uses a MD-averaged potential energy grid and a solvent-accessible surface area term with parameters GA fit to experimental data.
    Pearlman DA; Rao BG; Charifson P
    Proteins; 2008 May; 71(3):1519-38. PubMed ID: 18300249
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. 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]  

  • 11. Combining pharmacophore fingerprints and PLS-discriminant analysis for virtual screening and SAR elucidation.
    Askjaer S; Langgård M
    J Chem Inf Model; 2008 Mar; 48(3):476-88. PubMed ID: 18281962
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. 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]  

  • 13. Scoring ligand similarity in structure-based virtual screening.
    Zavodszky MI; Rohatgi A; Van Voorst JR; Yan H; Kuhn LA
    J Mol Recognit; 2009; 22(4):280-92. PubMed ID: 19235177
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Conditional probability: a new fusion method for merging disparate virtual screening results.
    Raymond JW; Jalaie M; Bradley MP
    J Chem Inf Comput Sci; 2004; 44(2):601-9. PubMed ID: 15032541
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Novel 2D fingerprints for ligand-based virtual screening.
    Ewing T; Baber JC; Feher M
    J Chem Inf Model; 2006; 46(6):2423-31. PubMed ID: 17125184
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Maximum common binding modes (MCBM): consensus docking scoring using multiple ligand information and interaction fingerprints.
    Renner S; Derksen S; Radestock S; Mörchen F
    J Chem Inf Model; 2008 Feb; 48(2):319-32. PubMed ID: 18211051
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Combinatorial Consensus Scoring for Ligand-Based Virtual Fragment Screening: A Comparative Case Study for Serotonin 5-HT(3)A, Histamine H(1), and Histamine H(4) Receptors.
    Schultes S; Kooistra AJ; Vischer HF; Nijmeijer S; Haaksma EE; Leurs R; de Esch IJ; de Graaf C
    J Chem Inf Model; 2015 May; 55(5):1030-44. PubMed ID: 25815783
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. 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]  

  • 19. A comparison of ligand based virtual screening methods and application to corticotropin releasing factor 1 receptor.
    Tresadern G; Bemporad D; Howe T
    J Mol Graph Model; 2009; 27(8):860-70. PubMed ID: 19230731
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Virtual screening against Mycobacterium tuberculosis dihydrofolate reductase: suggested workflow for compound prioritization using structure interaction fingerprints.
    Kumar A; Siddiqi MI
    J Mol Graph Model; 2008 Nov; 27(4):476-88. PubMed ID: 18829358
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 7.