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 *

149 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 21342566)

  • 1. Ligand binding site superposition and comparison based on Atomic Property Fields: identification of distant homologues, convergent evolution and PDB-wide clustering of binding sites.
    Totrov M
    BMC Bioinformatics; 2011 Feb; 12 Suppl 1(Suppl 1):S35. PubMed ID: 21342566
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. PLIC: protein-ligand interaction clusters.
    Anand P; Nagarajan D; Mukherjee S; Chandra N
    Database (Oxford); 2014; 2014(0):bau029. PubMed ID: 24763918
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Classification of ligand molecules in PDB with graph match-based structural superposition.
    Shionyu-Mitsuyama C; Hijikata A; Tsuji T; Shirai T
    J Struct Funct Genomics; 2016 Dec; 17(4):135-146. PubMed ID: 28012138
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. PESDserv: a server for high-throughput comparison of protein binding site surfaces.
    Das S; Krein MP; Breneman CM
    Bioinformatics; 2010 Aug; 26(15):1913-4. PubMed ID: 20538727
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Self-organizing fuzzy graphs for structure-based comparison of protein pockets.
    Reisen F; Weisel M; Kriegl JM; Schneider G
    J Proteome Res; 2010 Dec; 9(12):6498-510. PubMed ID: 20883038
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. A new protein binding pocket similarity measure based on comparison of clouds of atoms in 3D: application to ligand prediction.
    Hoffmann B; Zaslavskiy M; Vert JP; Stoven V
    BMC Bioinformatics; 2010 Feb; 11():99. PubMed ID: 20175916
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Comprehensive identification of "druggable" protein ligand binding sites.
    An J; Totrov M; Abagyan R
    Genome Inform; 2004; 15(2):31-41. PubMed ID: 15706489
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Ligand binding site similarity identification based on chemical and geometric similarity.
    Tu H; Shi T
    Protein J; 2013 Jun; 32(5):373-85. PubMed ID: 23700221
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Predicting protein-ligand binding site using support vector machine with protein properties.
    Wong GY; Leung FH; Ling SH
    IEEE/ACM Trans Comput Biol Bioinform; 2013; 10(6):1517-29. PubMed ID: 24407309
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. BioGPS: navigating biological space to predict polypharmacology, off-targeting, and selectivity.
    Siragusa L; Cross S; Baroni M; Goracci L; Cruciani G
    Proteins; 2015 Mar; 83(3):517-32. PubMed ID: 25556939
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Pocketome via comprehensive identification and classification of ligand binding envelopes.
    An J; Totrov M; Abagyan R
    Mol Cell Proteomics; 2005 Jun; 4(6):752-61. PubMed ID: 15757999
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. PDB-Ligand: a ligand database based on PDB for the automated and customized classification of ligand-binding structures.
    Shin JM; Cho DH
    Nucleic Acids Res; 2005 Jan; 33(Database issue):D238-41. PubMed ID: 15608186
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. sc-PDB: an annotated database of druggable binding sites from the Protein Data Bank.
    Kellenberger E; Muller P; Schalon C; Bret G; Foata N; Rognan D
    J Chem Inf Model; 2006; 46(2):717-27. PubMed ID: 16563002
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Binding similarity network of ligand.
    Park K; Kim D
    Proteins; 2008 May; 71(2):960-71. PubMed ID: 18004762
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Assessment of automatic ligand building in ARP/wARP.
    Evrard GX; Langer GG; Perrakis A; Lamzin VS
    Acta Crystallogr D Biol Crystallogr; 2007 Jan; 63(Pt 1):108-17. PubMed ID: 17164533
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Deciphering common recognition principles of nucleoside mono/di and tri-phosphates binding in diverse proteins via structural matching of their binding sites.
    Bhagavat R; Srinivasan N; Chandra N
    Proteins; 2017 Sep; 85(9):1699-1712. PubMed ID: 28547747
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. An Augmented Pocketome: Detection and Analysis of Small-Molecule Binding Pockets in Proteins of Known 3D Structure.
    Bhagavat R; Sankar S; Srinivasan N; Chandra N
    Structure; 2018 Mar; 26(3):499-512.e2. PubMed ID: 29514079
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Predicting ligand binding residues and functional sites using multipositional correlations with graph theoretic clustering and kernel CCA.
    González AJ; Liao L; Wu CH
    IEEE/ACM Trans Comput Biol Bioinform; 2012; 9(4):992-1001. PubMed ID: 22025754
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. From the similarity analysis of protein cavities to the functional classification of protein families using cavbase.
    Kuhn D; Weskamp N; Schmitt S; Hüllermeier E; Klebe G
    J Mol Biol; 2006 Jun; 359(4):1023-44. PubMed ID: 16697007
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. A common reference framework for analyzing/comparing proteins and ligands. Fingerprints for Ligands and Proteins (FLAP): theory and application.
    Baroni M; Cruciani G; Sciabola S; Perruccio F; Mason JS
    J Chem Inf Model; 2007; 47(2):279-94. PubMed ID: 17381166
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 8.