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 *

122 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 17004706)

  • 1. M-score: a knowledge-based potential scoring function accounting for protein atom mobility.
    Yang CY; Wang R; Wang S
    J Med Chem; 2006 Oct; 49(20):5903-11. PubMed ID: 17004706
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. An extensive test of 14 scoring functions using the PDBbind refined set of 800 protein-ligand complexes.
    Wang R; Lu Y; Fang X; Wang S
    J Chem Inf Comput Sci; 2004; 44(6):2114-25. PubMed ID: 15554682
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. A general and fast scoring function for protein-ligand interactions: a simplified potential approach.
    Muegge I; Martin YC
    J Med Chem; 1999 Mar; 42(5):791-804. PubMed ID: 10072678
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. A knowledge-based energy function for protein-ligand, protein-protein, and protein-DNA complexes.
    Zhang C; Liu S; Zhu Q; Zhou Y
    J Med Chem; 2005 Apr; 48(7):2325-35. PubMed ID: 15801826
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. PMF scoring revisited.
    Muegge I
    J Med Chem; 2006 Oct; 49(20):5895-902. PubMed ID: 17004705
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. An improved PMF scoring function for universally predicting the interactions of a ligand with protein, DNA, and RNA.
    Zhao X; Liu X; Wang Y; Chen Z; Kang L; Zhang H; Luo X; Zhu W; Chen K; Li H; Wang X; Jiang H
    J Chem Inf Model; 2008 Jul; 48(7):1438-47. PubMed ID: 18553962
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Comparative evaluation of 11 scoring functions for molecular docking.
    Wang R; Lu Y; Wang S
    J Med Chem; 2003 Jun; 46(12):2287-303. PubMed ID: 12773034
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Information theory-based scoring function for the structure-based prediction of protein-ligand binding affinity.
    Kulharia M; Goody RS; Jackson RM
    J Chem Inf Model; 2008 Oct; 48(10):1990-8. PubMed ID: 18767831
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. DrugScore(CSD)-knowledge-based scoring function derived from small molecule crystal data with superior recognition rate of near-native ligand poses and better affinity prediction.
    Velec HF; Gohlke H; Klebe G
    J Med Chem; 2005 Oct; 48(20):6296-303. PubMed ID: 16190756
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Predicting protein-ligand binding affinities: a low scoring game?
    Marsden PM; Puvanendrampillai D; Mitchell JB; Glen RC
    Org Biomol Chem; 2004 Nov; 2(22):3267-73. PubMed ID: 15534704
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. 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]  

  • 12. Predicting protein-ligand binding affinities using novel geometrical descriptors and machine-learning methods.
    Deng W; Breneman C; Embrechts MJ
    J Chem Inf Comput Sci; 2004; 44(2):699-703. PubMed ID: 15032552
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. An all atom energy based computational protocol for predicting binding affinities of protein-ligand complexes.
    Jain T; Jayaram B
    FEBS Lett; 2005 Dec; 579(29):6659-66. PubMed ID: 16307743
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Supervised scoring models with docked ligand conformations for structure-based virtual screening.
    Teramoto R; Fukunishi H
    J Chem Inf Model; 2007; 47(5):1858-67. PubMed ID: 17685604
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. The consequences of scoring docked ligand conformations using free energy correlations.
    Spyrakis F; Amadasi A; Fornabaio M; Abraham DJ; Mozzarelli A; Kellogg GE; Cozzini P
    Eur J Med Chem; 2007 Jul; 42(7):921-33. PubMed ID: 17346861
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Large-scale validation of a quantum mechanics based scoring function: predicting the binding affinity and the binding mode of a diverse set of protein-ligand complexes.
    Raha K; Merz KM
    J Med Chem; 2005 Jul; 48(14):4558-75. PubMed ID: 15999994
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. General and targeted statistical potentials for protein-ligand interactions.
    Mooij WT; Verdonk ML
    Proteins; 2005 Nov; 61(2):272-87. PubMed ID: 16106379
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Structural artifacts in protein-ligand X-ray structures: implications for the development of docking scoring functions.
    Søndergaard CR; Garrett AE; Carstensen T; Pollastri G; Nielsen JE
    J Med Chem; 2009 Sep; 52(18):5673-84. PubMed ID: 19711919
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. LigScore: a novel scoring function for predicting binding affinities.
    Krammer A; Kirchhoff PD; Jiang X; Venkatachalam CM; Waldman M
    J Mol Graph Model; 2005 Apr; 23(5):395-407. PubMed ID: 15781182
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. 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]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 7.