1549 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 17004707)
1. 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]
2. A detailed comparison of current docking and scoring methods on systems of pharmaceutical relevance.
Perola E; Walters WP; Charifson PS
Proteins; 2004 Aug; 56(2):235-49. PubMed ID: 15211508
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Evaluation of docking performance: comparative data on docking algorithms.
Kontoyianni M; McClellan LM; Sokol GS
J Med Chem; 2004 Jan; 47(3):558-65. PubMed ID: 14736237
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Lead finder: an approach to improve accuracy of protein-ligand docking, binding energy estimation, and virtual screening.
Stroganov OV; Novikov FN; Stroylov VS; Kulkov V; Chilov GG
J Chem Inf Model; 2008 Dec; 48(12):2371-85. PubMed ID: 19007114
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. 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]
6. Validation studies of the site-directed docking program LibDock.
Rao SN; Head MS; Kulkarni A; LaLonde JM
J Chem Inf Model; 2007; 47(6):2159-71. PubMed ID: 17985863
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Prediction of multiple binding modes of the CDK2 inhibitors, anilinopyrazoles, using the automated docking programs GOLD, FlexX, and LigandFit: an evaluation of performance.
Sato H; Shewchuk LM; Tang J
J Chem Inf Model; 2006; 46(6):2552-62. PubMed ID: 17125195
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. 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]
9. 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]
10. 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]
11. Assessing scoring functions for protein-ligand interactions.
Ferrara P; Gohlke H; Price DJ; Klebe G; Brooks CL
J Med Chem; 2004 Jun; 47(12):3032-47. PubMed ID: 15163185
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. 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]
13. FlexE: efficient molecular docking considering protein structure variations.
Claussen H; Buning C; Rarey M; Lengauer T
J Mol Biol; 2001 Apr; 308(2):377-95. PubMed ID: 11327774
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. 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]
15. Analysis and optimization of structure-based virtual screening protocols. (3). New methods and old problems in scoring function design.
Smith R; Hubbard RE; Gschwend DA; Leach AR; Good AC
J Mol Graph Model; 2003 Sep; 22(1):41-53. PubMed ID: 12798390
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. 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]
17. Molecular docking.
Morris GM; Lim-Wilby M
Methods Mol Biol; 2008; 443():365-82. PubMed ID: 18446297
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Multiple active site corrections for docking and virtual screening.
Vigers GP; Rizzi JP
J Med Chem; 2004 Jan; 47(1):80-9. PubMed ID: 14695822
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. 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]
20. Protein-ligand docking against non-native protein conformers.
Verdonk ML; Mortenson PN; Hall RJ; Hartshorn MJ; Murray CW
J Chem Inf Model; 2008 Nov; 48(11):2214-25. PubMed ID: 18954138
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
