198 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 17482856)
1. Novel DOCK clique driven 3D similarity database search tools for molecule shape matching and beyond: adding flexibility to the search for ligand kin.
Good AC
J Mol Graph Model; 2007 Oct; 26(3):656-66. PubMed ID: 17482856
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Flexible 3D pharmacophores as descriptors of dynamic biological space.
Nettles JH; Jenkins JL; Williams C; Clark AM; Bender A; Deng Z; Davies JW; Glick M
J Mol Graph Model; 2007 Oct; 26(3):622-33. PubMed ID: 17395510
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Unconventional 2D shape similarity method affords comparable enrichment as a 3D shape method in virtual screening experiments.
Ebalunode JO; Zheng W
J Chem Inf Model; 2009 Jun; 49(6):1313-20. PubMed ID: 19480404
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Comparative evaluation of 3D virtual ligand screening methods: impact of the molecular alignment on enrichment.
Giganti D; Guillemain H; Spadoni JL; Nilges M; Zagury JF; Montes M
J Chem Inf Model; 2010 Jun; 50(6):992-1004. PubMed ID: 20527883
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Atomic property fields: generalized 3D pharmacophoric potential for automated ligand superposition, pharmacophore elucidation and 3D QSAR.
Totrov M
Chem Biol Drug Des; 2008 Jan; 71(1):15-27. PubMed ID: 18069986
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Virtual screening for R-groups, including predicted pIC50 contributions, within large structural databases, using Topomer CoMFA.
Cramer RD; Cruz P; Stahl G; Curtiss WC; Campbell B; Masek BB; Soltanshahi F
J Chem Inf Model; 2008 Nov; 48(11):2180-95. PubMed ID: 18956863
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Fast and efficient in silico 3D screening: toward maximum computational efficiency of pharmacophore-based and shape-based approaches.
Kirchmair J; Ristic S; Eder K; Markt P; Wolber G; Laggner C; Langer T
J Chem Inf Model; 2007; 47(6):2182-96. PubMed ID: 17929799
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Novel approach to structure-based pharmacophore search using computational geometry and shape matching techniques.
Ebalunode JO; Ouyang Z; Liang J; Zheng W
J Chem Inf Model; 2008 Apr; 48(4):889-901. PubMed ID: 18396858
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Impact of conformational flexibility on three-dimensional similarity searching using correlation vectors.
Renner S; Schwab CH; Gasteiger J; Schneider G
J Chem Inf Model; 2006; 46(6):2324-32. PubMed ID: 17125176
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Ultrafast shape recognition: evaluating a new ligand-based virtual screening technology.
Ballester PJ; Finn PW; Richards WG
J Mol Graph Model; 2009 Apr; 27(7):836-45. PubMed ID: 19188082
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Automated generation of MCSS-derived pharmacophoric DOCK site points for searching multiconformation databases.
Joseph-McCarthy D; Alvarez JC
Proteins; 2003 May; 51(2):189-202. PubMed ID: 12660988
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. "Bayes affinity fingerprints" improve retrieval rates in virtual screening and define orthogonal bioactivity space: when are multitarget drugs a feasible concept?
Bender A; Jenkins JL; Glick M; Deng Z; Nettles JH; Davies JW
J Chem Inf Model; 2006; 46(6):2445-56. PubMed ID: 17125186
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Fast structure-based virtual ligand screening combining FRED, DOCK, and Surflex.
Miteva MA; Lee WH; Montes MO; Villoutreix BO
J Med Chem; 2005 Sep; 48(19):6012-22. PubMed ID: 16162004
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Critical assessment of the automated AutoDock as a new docking tool for virtual screening.
Park H; Lee J; Lee S
Proteins; 2006 Nov; 65(3):549-54. PubMed ID: 16988956
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Rapid shape-based ligand alignment and virtual screening method based on atom/feature-pair similarities and volume overlap scoring.
Sastry GM; Dixon SL; Sherman W
J Chem Inf Model; 2011 Oct; 51(10):2455-66. PubMed ID: 21870862
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. CO: A chemical ontology for identification of functional groups and semantic comparison of small molecules.
Feldman HJ; Dumontier M; Ling S; Haider N; Hogue CW
FEBS Lett; 2005 Aug; 579(21):4685-91. PubMed ID: 16098521
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Improving virtual screening performance against conformational variations of receptors by shape matching with ligand binding pocket.
Lee HS; Lee CS; Kim JS; Kim DH; Choe H
J Chem Inf Model; 2009 Nov; 49(11):2419-28. PubMed ID: 19852439
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Integrating structure- and ligand-based virtual screening: comparison of individual, parallel, and fused molecular docking and similarity search calculations on multiple targets.
Tan L; Geppert H; Sisay MT; Gütschow M; Bajorath J
ChemMedChem; 2008 Oct; 3(10):1566-71. PubMed ID: 18651695
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Comparison of 2D fingerprint methods for multiple-template similarity searching on compound activity classes of increasing structural diversity.
Tovar A; Eckert H; Bajorath J
ChemMedChem; 2007 Feb; 2(2):208-17. PubMed ID: 17143917
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Virtual high-throughput screening of molecular databases.
Seifert MH; Kraus J; Kramer B
Curr Opin Drug Discov Devel; 2007 May; 10(3):298-307. PubMed ID: 17554856
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
