236 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]
