219 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 23782297)
1. Boosting virtual screening enrichments with data fusion: coalescing hits from two-dimensional fingerprints, shape, and docking.
Sastry GM; Inakollu VS; Sherman W
J Chem Inf Model; 2013 Jul; 53(7):1531-42. PubMed ID: 23782297
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. SABRE: ligand/structure-based virtual screening approach using consensus molecular-shape pattern recognition.
Wei NN; Hamza A
J Chem Inf Model; 2014 Jan; 54(1):338-46. PubMed ID: 24328054
[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. Improvement of virtual screening results by docking data feature analysis.
Arciniega M; Lange OF
J Chem Inf Model; 2014 May; 54(5):1401-11. PubMed ID: 24796936
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. 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]
6. Comparison of topological descriptors for similarity-based virtual screening using multiple bioactive reference structures.
Hert J; Willett P; Wilton DJ; Acklin P; Azzaoui K; Jacoby E; Schuffenhauer A
Org Biomol Chem; 2004 Nov; 2(22):3256-66. PubMed ID: 15534703
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Enhancing molecular shape comparison by weighted Gaussian functions.
Yan X; Li J; Liu Z; Zheng M; Ge H; Xu J
J Chem Inf Model; 2013 Aug; 53(8):1967-78. PubMed ID: 23845061
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Virtual drug screen schema based on multiview similarity integration and ranking aggregation.
Kang H; Sheng Z; Zhu R; Huang Q; Liu Q; Cao Z
J Chem Inf Model; 2012 Mar; 52(3):834-43. PubMed ID: 22332590
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Comparative evaluation of 3D virtual ligand screening methods: impact of the molecular alignment on enrichment.
Giganti D; Guillemain H; Spadoni JL; Nilges M; Zagury JF; Montes M
J Chem Inf Model; 2010 Jun; 50(6):992-1004. PubMed ID: 20527883
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Atom pair 2D-fingerprints perceive 3D-molecular shape and pharmacophores for very fast virtual screening of ZINC and GDB-17.
Awale M; Reymond JL
J Chem Inf Model; 2014 Jul; 54(7):1892-907. PubMed ID: 24988038
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Analysis and comparison of 2D fingerprints: insights into database screening performance using eight fingerprint methods.
Duan J; Dixon SL; Lowrie JF; Sherman W
J Mol Graph Model; 2010 Sep; 29(2):157-70. PubMed ID: 20579912
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. How to benchmark methods for structure-based virtual screening of large compound libraries.
Christofferson AJ; Huang N
Methods Mol Biol; 2012; 819():187-95. PubMed ID: 22183538
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Comparison of topological, shape, and docking methods in virtual screening.
McGaughey GB; Sheridan RP; Bayly CI; Culberson JC; Kreatsoulas C; Lindsley S; Maiorov V; Truchon JF; Cornell WD
J Chem Inf Model; 2007; 47(4):1504-19. PubMed ID: 17591764
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. 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]
15. LigMatch: a multiple structure-based ligand matching method for 3D virtual screening.
Kinnings SL; Jackson RM
J Chem Inf Model; 2009 Sep; 49(9):2056-66. PubMed ID: 19685924
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Virtual screening data fusion using both structure- and ligand-based methods.
Svensson F; Karlén A; Sköld C
J Chem Inf Model; 2012 Jan; 52(1):225-32. PubMed ID: 22148635
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Unconventional 2D shape similarity method affords comparable enrichment as a 3D shape method in virtual screening experiments.
Ebalunode JO; Zheng W
J Chem Inf Model; 2009 Jun; 49(6):1313-20. PubMed ID: 19480404
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Reliability analysis and optimization of the consensus docking approach for the development of virtual screening studies.
Poli G; Martinelli A; Tuccinardi T
J Enzyme Inhib Med Chem; 2016; 31(sup2):167-173. PubMed ID: 27311630
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. FINDSITE(comb): a threading/structure-based, proteomic-scale virtual ligand screening approach.
Zhou H; Skolnick J
J Chem Inf Model; 2013 Jan; 53(1):230-40. PubMed ID: 23240691
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Optimization of high throughput virtual screening by combining shape-matching and docking methods.
Lee HS; Choi J; Kufareva I; Abagyan R; Filikov A; Yang Y; Yoon S
J Chem Inf Model; 2008 Mar; 48(3):489-97. PubMed ID: 18302357
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
