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 *

119 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 21139274)

  • 1. Evaluation of docking calculations on X-ray structures using CONSENSUS-DOCK.
    Okamoto M; Masuda Y; Muroya A; Yasuno K; Takahashi O; Furuya T
    Chem Pharm Bull (Tokyo); 2010 Dec; 58(12):1655-7. PubMed ID: 21139274
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Consensus scoring for ligand/protein interactions.
    Clark RD; Strizhev A; Leonard JM; Blake JF; Matthew JB
    J Mol Graph Model; 2002 Jan; 20(4):281-95. PubMed ID: 11858637
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Evaluation of docking/scoring approaches: a comparative study based on MMP3 inhibitors.
    Ha S; Andreani R; Robbins A; Muegge I
    J Comput Aided Mol Des; 2000 Jul; 14(5):435-48. PubMed ID: 10896316
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. The MPSim-Dock hierarchical docking algorithm: application to the eight trypsin inhibitor cocrystals.
    Cho AE; Wendel JA; Vaidehi N; Kekenes-Huskey PM; Floriano WB; Maiti PK; Goddard WA
    J Comput Chem; 2005 Jan; 26(1):48-71. PubMed ID: 15529328
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Evaluation and application of multiple scoring functions for a virtual screening experiment.
    Xing L; Hodgkin E; Liu Q; Sedlock D
    J Comput Aided Mol Des; 2004 May; 18(5):333-44. PubMed ID: 15595460
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. 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]  

  • 7. Development and validation of a modular, extensible docking program: DOCK 5.
    Moustakas DT; Lang PT; Pegg S; Pettersen E; Kuntz ID; Brooijmans N; Rizzo RC
    J Comput Aided Mol Des; 2006; 20(10-11):601-19. PubMed ID: 17149653
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. A virtual high throughput screen for high affinity cytochrome P450cam substrates. Implications for in silico prediction of drug metabolism.
    Keseru GM
    J Comput Aided Mol Des; 2001 Jul; 15(7):649-57. PubMed ID: 11688945
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Structure-Based Virtual Screening.
    Li Q; Shah S
    Methods Mol Biol; 2017; 1558():111-124. PubMed ID: 28150235
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. 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]  

  • 11. FRED and HYBRID docking performance on standardized datasets.
    McGann M
    J Comput Aided Mol Des; 2012 Aug; 26(8):897-906. PubMed ID: 22669221
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Comparison of consensus scoring strategies for evaluating computational models of protein-ligand complexes.
    Oda A; Tsuchida K; Takakura T; Yamaotsu N; Hirono S
    J Chem Inf Model; 2006; 46(1):380-91. PubMed ID: 16426072
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. The SKE-DOCK server and human teams based on a combined method of shape complementarity and free energy estimation.
    Terashi G; Takeda-Shitaka M; Kanou K; Iwadate M; Takaya D; Umeyama H
    Proteins; 2007 Dec; 69(4):866-72. PubMed ID: 17853449
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Ranking docking poses by graph matching of protein-ligand interactions: lessons learned from the D3R Grand Challenge 2.
    da Silva Figueiredo Celestino Gomes P; Da Silva F; Bret G; Rognan D
    J Comput Aided Mol Des; 2018 Jan; 32(1):75-87. PubMed ID: 28766097
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Protein ligand docking based on empirical method for binding affinity estimation.
    Tao P; Lai L
    J Comput Aided Mol Des; 2001 May; 15(5):429-46. PubMed ID: 11394737
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Comparative evaluation of eight docking tools for docking and virtual screening accuracy.
    Kellenberger E; Rodrigo J; Muller P; Rognan D
    Proteins; 2004 Nov; 57(2):225-42. PubMed ID: 15340911
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. ConsDock: A new program for the consensus analysis of protein-ligand interactions.
    Paul N; Rognan D
    Proteins; 2002 Jun; 47(4):521-33. PubMed ID: 12001231
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. ProSelection: A Novel Algorithm to Select Proper Protein Structure Subsets for in Silico Target Identification and Drug Discovery Research.
    Wang N; Wang L; Xie XQ
    J Chem Inf Model; 2017 Nov; 57(11):2686-2698. PubMed ID: 29016123
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. 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]  

  • 20. Comparison of several molecular docking programs: pose prediction and virtual screening accuracy.
    Cross JB; Thompson DC; Rai BK; Baber JC; Fan KY; Hu Y; Humblet C
    J Chem Inf Model; 2009 Jun; 49(6):1455-74. PubMed ID: 19476350
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 6.