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 *

233 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 21528911)

  • 1. Predicting fragment binding poses using a combined MCSS MM-GBSA approach.
    Haider MK; Bertrand HO; Hubbard RE
    J Chem Inf Model; 2011 May; 51(5):1092-105. PubMed ID: 21528911
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Improving docking results via reranking of ensembles of ligand poses in multiple X-ray protein conformations with MM-GBSA.
    Greenidge PA; Kramer C; Mozziconacci JC; Sherman W
    J Chem Inf Model; 2014 Oct; 54(10):2697-717. PubMed ID: 25266271
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Toward fully automated high performance computing drug discovery: a massively parallel virtual screening pipeline for docking and molecular mechanics/generalized Born surface area rescoring to improve enrichment.
    Zhang X; Wong SE; Lightstone FC
    J Chem Inf Model; 2014 Jan; 54(1):324-37. PubMed ID: 24358939
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. 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]  

  • 5. Binding-affinity predictions of HSP90 in the D3R Grand Challenge 2015 with docking, MM/GBSA, QM/MM, and free-energy simulations.
    Misini Ignjatović M; Caldararu O; Dong G; Muñoz-Gutierrez C; Adasme-Carreño F; Ryde U
    J Comput Aided Mol Des; 2016 Sep; 30(9):707-730. PubMed ID: 27565797
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Large scale free energy calculations for blind predictions of protein-ligand binding: the D3R Grand Challenge 2015.
    Deng N; Flynn WF; Xia J; Vijayan RS; Zhang B; He P; Mentes A; Gallicchio E; Levy RM
    J Comput Aided Mol Des; 2016 Sep; 30(9):743-751. PubMed ID: 27562018
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. In silico fragment-based drug discovery: setup and validation of a fragment-to-lead computational protocol using S4MPLE.
    Hoffer L; Renaud JP; Horvath D
    J Chem Inf Model; 2013 Apr; 53(4):836-51. PubMed ID: 23537132
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Prediction of estrogen receptor β ligands potency and selectivity by docking and MM-GBSA scoring methods using three different scaffolds.
    Balaji B; Ramanathan M
    J Enzyme Inhib Med Chem; 2012 Dec; 27(6):832-44. PubMed ID: 21999568
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Assessing the performance of the MM/PBSA and MM/GBSA methods. 6. Capability to predict protein-protein binding free energies and re-rank binding poses generated by protein-protein docking.
    Chen F; Liu H; Sun H; Pan P; Li Y; Li D; Hou T
    Phys Chem Chem Phys; 2016 Aug; 18(32):22129-39. PubMed ID: 27444142
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Assessing the performance of MM/PBSA and MM/GBSA methods. 10. Prediction reliability of binding affinities and binding poses for RNA-ligand complexes.
    Jiang D; Du H; Zhao H; Deng Y; Wu Z; Wang J; Zeng Y; Zhang H; Wang X; Wang E; Hou T; Hsieh CY
    Phys Chem Chem Phys; 2024 Mar; 26(13):10323-10335. PubMed ID: 38501198
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Knowledge-guided docking: accurate prospective prediction of bound configurations of novel ligands using Surflex-Dock.
    Cleves AE; Jain AN
    J Comput Aided Mol Des; 2015 Jun; 29(6):485-509. PubMed ID: 25940276
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. A Comprehensive Docking and MM/GBSA Rescoring Study of Ligand Recognition upon Binding Antithrombin.
    Zhang X; Perez-Sanchez H; Lightstone FC
    Curr Top Med Chem; 2017; 17(14):1631-1639. PubMed ID: 27852201
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Incorporating replacement free energy of binding-site waters in molecular docking.
    Sun H; Zhao L; Peng S; Huang N
    Proteins; 2014 Sep; 82(9):1765-76. PubMed ID: 24549784
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Postprocessing of docked protein-ligand complexes using implicit solvation models.
    Lindström A; Edvinsson L; Johansson A; Andersson CD; Andersson IE; Raubacher F; Linusson A
    J Chem Inf Model; 2011 Feb; 51(2):267-82. PubMed ID: 21309544
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Unveiling the full potential of flexible receptor docking using multiple crystallographic structures.
    Barril X; Morley SD
    J Med Chem; 2005 Jun; 48(13):4432-43. PubMed ID: 15974595
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. FDS: flexible ligand and receptor docking with a continuum solvent model and soft-core energy function.
    Taylor RD; Jewsbury PJ; Essex JW
    J Comput Chem; 2003 Oct; 24(13):1637-56. PubMed ID: 12926007
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Protein flexibility in ligand docking and virtual screening to protein kinases.
    Cavasotto CN; Abagyan RA
    J Mol Biol; 2004 Mar; 337(1):209-25. PubMed ID: 15001363
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Case-specific performance of MM-PBSA, MM-GBSA, and SIE in virtual screening.
    Virtanen SI; Niinivehmas SP; Pentikäinen OT
    J Mol Graph Model; 2015 Nov; 62():303-318. PubMed ID: 26550792
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Structure-based identification of binding sites, native ligands and potential inhibitors for G-protein coupled receptors.
    Cavasotto CN; Orry AJ; Abagyan RA
    Proteins; 2003 May; 51(3):423-33. PubMed ID: 12696053
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Improved docking of polypeptides with Glide.
    Tubert-Brohman I; Sherman W; Repasky M; Beuming T
    J Chem Inf Model; 2013 Jul; 53(7):1689-99. PubMed ID: 23800267
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 12.