169 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 22468890)
1. Identifying and characterizing promiscuous targets: implications for virtual screening.
Pérez-Nueno VI; Ritchie DW
Expert Opin Drug Discov; 2012 Jan; 7(1):1-17. PubMed ID: 22468890
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Using consensus-shape clustering to identify promiscuous ligands and protein targets and to choose the right query for shape-based virtual screening.
Pérez-Nueno VI; Ritchie DW
J Chem Inf Model; 2011 Jun; 51(6):1233-48. PubMed ID: 21604699
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Protein promiscuity: drug resistance and native functions--HIV-1 case.
Fernández A; Tawfik DS; Berkhout B; Sanders R; Kloczkowski A; Sen T; Jernigan B
J Biomol Struct Dyn; 2005 Jun; 22(6):615-24. PubMed ID: 15842167
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Efficient virtual screening using multiple protein conformations described as negative images of the ligand-binding site.
Virtanen SI; Pentikäinen OT
J Chem Inf Model; 2010 Jun; 50(6):1005-11. PubMed ID: 20504004
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. VS-APPLE: A Virtual Screening Algorithm Using Promiscuous Protein-Ligand Complexes.
Okuno T; Kato K; Terada TP; Sasai M; Chikenji G
J Chem Inf Model; 2015 Jun; 55(6):1108-19. PubMed ID: 26057716
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Integrating ligand-based and protein-centric virtual screening of kinase inhibitors using ensembles of multiple protein kinase genes and conformations.
Dixit A; Verkhivker GM
J Chem Inf Model; 2012 Oct; 52(10):2501-15. PubMed ID: 22992037
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Ranking targets in structure-based virtual screening of three-dimensional protein libraries: methods and problems.
Kellenberger E; Foata N; Rognan D
J Chem Inf Model; 2008 May; 48(5):1014-25. PubMed ID: 18412328
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Consensus scoring for protein-ligand interactions.
Feher M
Drug Discov Today; 2006 May; 11(9-10):421-8. PubMed ID: 16635804
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. High Impact: The Role of Promiscuous Binding Sites in Polypharmacology.
Cerisier N; Petitjean M; Regad L; Bayard Q; Réau M; Badel A; Camproux AC
Molecules; 2019 Jul; 24(14):. PubMed ID: 31295958
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Consensus scoring criteria for improving enrichment in virtual screening.
Yang JM; Chen YF; Shen TW; Kristal BS; Hsu DF
J Chem Inf Model; 2005; 45(4):1134-46. PubMed ID: 16045308
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. High-throughput virtual screening of proteins using GRID molecular interaction fields.
Sciabola S; Stanton RV; Mills JE; Flocco MM; Baroni M; Cruciani G; Perruccio F; Mason JS
J Chem Inf Model; 2010 Jan; 50(1):155-69. PubMed ID: 19919042
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Virtual compound screening in drug discovery.
Stumpfe D; Ripphausen P; Bajorath J
Future Med Chem; 2012 Apr; 4(5):593-602. PubMed ID: 22458679
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Importance of molecular computer modeling in anticancer drug development.
Geromichalos GD
J BUON; 2007 Sep; 12 Suppl 1():S101-18. PubMed ID: 17935268
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Clustering and classifying diverse HIV entry inhibitors using a novel consensus shape-based virtual screening approach: further evidence for multiple binding sites within the CCR5 extracellular pocket.
Pérez-Nueno VI; Ritchie DW; Borrell JI; Teixidó J
J Chem Inf Model; 2008 Nov; 48(11):2146-65. PubMed ID: 18942828
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. ReverseScreen3D: a structure-based ligand matching method to identify protein targets.
Kinnings SL; Jackson RM
J Chem Inf Model; 2011 Mar; 51(3):624-34. PubMed ID: 21361385
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Analysis and optimization of structure-based virtual screening protocols (1): exploration of ligand conformational sampling techniques.
Good AC; Cheney DL
J Mol Graph Model; 2003 Sep; 22(1):23-30. PubMed ID: 12798388
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. [Development of antituberculous drugs: current status and future prospects].
Tomioka H; Namba K
Kekkaku; 2006 Dec; 81(12):753-74. PubMed ID: 17240921
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Predicting the multi-modal binding propensity of small molecules: towards an understanding of drug promiscuity.
Park K; Lee S; Ahn HS; Kim D
Mol Biosyst; 2009 Aug; 5(8):844-53. PubMed ID: 19603120
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Virtual screening in drug design.
Lill M
Methods Mol Biol; 2013; 993():1-12. PubMed ID: 23568460
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Comprehensive comparison of ligand-based virtual screening tools against the DUD data set reveals limitations of current 3D methods.
Venkatraman V; Pérez-Nueno VI; Mavridis L; Ritchie DW
J Chem Inf Model; 2010 Dec; 50(12):2079-93. PubMed ID: 21090728
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
