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 *

311 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 17004700)

  • 1. Prediction of protein-ligand interactions. Docking and scoring: successes and gaps.
    Leach AR; Shoichet BK; Peishoff CE
    J Med Chem; 2006 Oct; 49(20):5851-5. PubMed ID: 17004700
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. 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]  

  • 3. Novel procedure for modeling ligand/receptor induced fit effects.
    Sherman W; Day T; Jacobson MP; Friesner RA; Farid R
    J Med Chem; 2006 Jan; 49(2):534-53. PubMed ID: 16420040
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Importance of molecular computer modeling in anticancer drug development.
    Geromichalos GD
    J BUON; 2007 Sep; 12 Suppl 1():S101-18. PubMed ID: 17935268
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Molecular modeling of hydration in drug design.
    Mancera RL
    Curr Opin Drug Discov Devel; 2007 May; 10(3):275-80. PubMed ID: 17554853
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Extra precision glide: docking and scoring incorporating a model of hydrophobic enclosure for protein-ligand complexes.
    Friesner RA; Murphy RB; Repasky MP; Frye LL; Greenwood JR; Halgren TA; Sanschagrin PC; Mainz DT
    J Med Chem; 2006 Oct; 49(21):6177-96. PubMed ID: 17034125
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Consensus scoring for protein-ligand interactions.
    Feher M
    Drug Discov Today; 2006 May; 11(9-10):421-8. PubMed ID: 16635804
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. 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]  

  • 9. Combining docking, scoring and molecular field analyses to probe influenza neuraminidase-ligand interactions.
    Abu Hammad AM; Afifi FU; Taha MO
    J Mol Graph Model; 2007 Sep; 26(2):443-56. PubMed ID: 17360207
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Molecular docking.
    Morris GM; Lim-Wilby M
    Methods Mol Biol; 2008; 443():365-82. PubMed ID: 18446297
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Combination of a modified scoring function with two-dimensional descriptors for calculation of binding affinities of bulky, flexible ligands to proteins.
    Hetényi C; Paragi G; Maran U; Timár Z; Karelson M; Penke B
    J Am Chem Soc; 2006 Feb; 128(4):1233-9. PubMed ID: 16433540
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. The use of protein-ligand interaction fingerprints in docking.
    Brewerton SC
    Curr Opin Drug Discov Devel; 2008 May; 11(3):356-64. PubMed ID: 18428089
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. 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]  

  • 14. MolDock: a new technique for high-accuracy molecular docking.
    Thomsen R; Christensen MH
    J Med Chem; 2006 Jun; 49(11):3315-21. PubMed ID: 16722650
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Diverse, high-quality test set for the validation of protein-ligand docking performance.
    Hartshorn MJ; Verdonk ML; Chessari G; Brewerton SC; Mooij WT; Mortenson PN; Murray CW
    J Med Chem; 2007 Feb; 50(4):726-41. PubMed ID: 17300160
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Contribution of conformer focusing to the uncertainty in predicting free energies for protein-ligand binding.
    Tirado-Rives J; Jorgensen WL
    J Med Chem; 2006 Oct; 49(20):5880-4. PubMed ID: 17004703
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Variation of protein binding cavity volume and ligand volume in protein-ligand complexes.
    Saranya N; Selvaraj S
    Bioorg Med Chem Lett; 2009 Oct; 19(19):5769-72. PubMed ID: 19706358
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. 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]  

  • 19. Docking and scoring with alternative side-chain conformations.
    Hartmann C; Antes I; Lengauer T
    Proteins; 2009 Feb; 74(3):712-26. PubMed ID: 18704939
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. PostDOCK: a structural, empirical approach to scoring protein ligand complexes.
    Springer C; Adalsteinsson H; Young MM; Kegelmeyer PW; Roe DC
    J Med Chem; 2005 Nov; 48(22):6821-31. PubMed ID: 16250641
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 16.