148 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 23845061)
1. 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]
2. 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]
3. Molecular dynamics, density functional, ADMET predictions, virtual screening, and molecular interaction field studies for identification and evaluation of novel potential CDK2 inhibitors in cancer therapy.
da Silva VB; Kawano DF; Gomes Ada S; Carvalho I; Taft CA; da Silva CH
J Phys Chem A; 2008 Sep; 112(38):8902-10. PubMed ID: 18698751
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. 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]
5. 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]
6. Application of Shape Similarity in Pose Selection and Virtual Screening in CSARdock2014 Exercise.
Kumar A; Zhang KY
J Chem Inf Model; 2016 Jun; 56(6):965-73. PubMed ID: 26247231
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. New scoring functions for virtual screening from molecular dynamics simulations with a quantum-refined force-field (QRFF-MD). Application to cyclin-dependent kinase 2.
Ferrara P; Curioni A; Vangrevelinghe E; Meyer T; Mordasini T; Andreoni W; Acklin P; Jacoby E
J Chem Inf Model; 2006; 46(1):254-63. PubMed ID: 16426061
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. 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]
9. SimG: an alignment based method for evaluating the similarity of small molecules and binding sites.
Cai C; Gong J; Liu X; Gao D; Li H
J Chem Inf Model; 2013 Aug; 53(8):2103-15. PubMed ID: 23889471
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. How to choose relevant multiple receptor conformations for virtual screening: a test case of Cdk2 and normal mode analysis.
Sperandio O; Mouawad L; Pinto E; Villoutreix BO; Perahia D; Miteva MA
Eur Biophys J; 2010 Aug; 39(9):1365-72. PubMed ID: 20237920
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Discovery of novel Pim-1 kinase inhibitors by a hierarchical multistage virtual screening approach based on SVM model, pharmacophore, and molecular docking.
Ren JX; Li LL; Zheng RL; Xie HZ; Cao ZX; Feng S; Pan YL; Chen X; Wei YQ; Yang SY
J Chem Inf Model; 2011 Jun; 51(6):1364-75. PubMed ID: 21618971
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Virtual screening to enrich a compound collection with CDK2 inhibitors using docking, scoring, and composite scoring models.
Cotesta S; Giordanetto F; Trosset JY; Crivori P; Kroemer RT; Stouten PF; Vulpetti A
Proteins; 2005 Sep; 60(4):629-43. PubMed ID: 16028223
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Virtual target screening: validation using kinase inhibitors.
Santiago DN; Pevzner Y; Durand AA; Tran M; Scheerer RR; Daniel K; Sung SS; Woodcock HL; Guida WC; Brooks WH
J Chem Inf Model; 2012 Aug; 52(8):2192-203. PubMed ID: 22747098
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. The ensemble performance index: an improved measure for assessing ensemble pose prediction performance.
Korb O; McCabe P; Cole J
J Chem Inf Model; 2011 Nov; 51(11):2915-9. PubMed ID: 21962010
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Consensus scoring approach to identify the inhibitors of AMP-activated protein kinase α2 with virtual screening.
Park H; Eom JW; Kim YH
J Chem Inf Model; 2014 Jul; 54(7):2139-46. PubMed ID: 24915156
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Addressing limitations with the MM-GB/SA scoring procedure using the WaterMap method and free energy perturbation calculations.
Guimarães CR; Mathiowetz AM
J Chem Inf Model; 2010 Apr; 50(4):547-59. PubMed ID: 20235592
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Highly specific and sensitive pharmacophore model for identifying CXCR4 antagonists. Comparison with docking and shape-matching virtual screening performance.
Karaboga AS; Planesas JM; Petronin F; Teixidó J; Souchet M; Pérez-Nueno VI
J Chem Inf Model; 2013 May; 53(5):1043-56. PubMed ID: 23577723
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Rapid shape-based ligand alignment and virtual screening method based on atom/feature-pair similarities and volume overlap scoring.
Sastry GM; Dixon SL; Sherman W
J Chem Inf Model; 2011 Oct; 51(10):2455-66. PubMed ID: 21870862
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. 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]
20. gWEGA: GPU-accelerated WEGA for molecular superposition and shape comparison.
Yan X; Li J; Gu Q; Xu J
J Comput Chem; 2014 Jun; 35(15):1122-30. PubMed ID: 24729358
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
