770 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 18300249)
1. 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]
2. 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]
3. 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]
4. Docking ligands into flexible and solvated macromolecules. 5. Force-field-based prediction of binding affinities of ligands to proteins.
Englebienne P; Moitessier N
J Chem Inf Model; 2009 Nov; 49(11):2564-71. PubMed ID: 19928836
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. SFCscore: scoring functions for affinity prediction of protein-ligand complexes.
Sotriffer CA; Sanschagrin P; Matter H; Klebe G
Proteins; 2008 Nov; 73(2):395-419. PubMed ID: 18442132
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. 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]
7. 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]
8. Physical scoring function based on AMBER force field and Poisson-Boltzmann implicit solvent for protein structure prediction.
Hsieh MJ; Luo R
Proteins; 2004 Aug; 56(3):475-86. PubMed ID: 15229881
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Structural parameterization of the binding enthalpy of small ligands.
Luque I; Freire E
Proteins; 2002 Nov; 49(2):181-90. PubMed ID: 12210999
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Estimating protein-ligand binding free energy: atomic solvation parameters for partition coefficient and solvation free energy calculation.
Pei J; Wang Q; Zhou J; Lai L
Proteins; 2004 Dec; 57(4):651-64. PubMed ID: 15390269
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Distinguish protein decoys by using a scoring function based on a new AMBER force field, short molecular dynamics simulations, and the generalized born solvent model.
Lee MC; Duan Y
Proteins; 2004 May; 55(3):620-34. PubMed ID: 15103626
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Ranking poses in structure-based lead discovery and optimization: current trends in scoring function development.
Rajamani R; Good AC
Curr Opin Drug Discov Devel; 2007 May; 10(3):308-15. PubMed ID: 17554857
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Soft energy function and generic evolutionary method for discriminating native from nonnative protein conformations.
Chiu YY; Hwang JK; Yang JM
J Comput Chem; 2008 Jul; 29(9):1364-73. PubMed ID: 18181137
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. A new implicit solvent model for protein-ligand docking.
Morreale A; Gil-Redondo R; Ortiz AR
Proteins; 2007 May; 67(3):606-16. PubMed ID: 17330937
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. New scoring functions for virtual screening from molecular dynamics simulations with a quantum-refined force-field (QRFF-MD). Application to cyclin-dependent kinase 2.
Ferrara P; Curioni A; Vangrevelinghe E; Meyer T; Mordasini T; Andreoni W; Acklin P; Jacoby E
J Chem Inf Model; 2006; 46(1):254-63. PubMed ID: 16426061
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. 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]
17. Validation of an automated procedure for the prediction of relative free energies of binding on a set of aldose reductase inhibitors.
Ferrari AM; Degliesposti G; Sgobba M; Rastelli G
Bioorg Med Chem; 2007 Dec; 15(24):7865-77. PubMed ID: 17870536
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Shape signatures: a new approach to computer-aided ligand- and receptor-based drug design.
Zauhar RJ; Moyna G; Tian L; Li Z; Welsh WJ
J Med Chem; 2003 Dec; 46(26):5674-90. PubMed ID: 14667221
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Drug efficiency indices for improvement of molecular docking scoring functions.
García-Sosa AT; Hetényi C; Maran U
J Comput Chem; 2010 Jan; 31(1):174-84. PubMed ID: 19422000
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. 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]
[Next] [New Search]
