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 *

159 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 24563257)

  • 1. Improved protein-ligand binding affinity prediction by using a curvature-dependent surface-area model.
    Cao Y; Li L
    Bioinformatics; 2014 Jun; 30(12):1674-80. PubMed ID: 24563257
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Evaluation of Protein-Ligand Docking by Cyscore.
    Cao Y; Dai W; Miao Z
    Methods Mol Biol; 2018; 1762():233-243. PubMed ID: 29594775
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Comparative assessment of scoring functions on an updated benchmark: 2. Evaluation methods and general results.
    Li Y; Han L; Liu Z; Wang R
    J Chem Inf Model; 2014 Jun; 54(6):1717-36. PubMed ID: 24708446
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. ID-Score: a new empirical scoring function based on a comprehensive set of descriptors related to protein-ligand interactions.
    Li GB; Yang LL; Wang WJ; Li LL; Yang SY
    J Chem Inf Model; 2013 Mar; 53(3):592-600. PubMed ID: 23394072
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Ligand-specific scoring functions: improved ranking of docking solutions.
    Pyrkov TV; Priestle JP; Jacoby E; Efremov RG
    SAR QSAR Environ Res; 2008; 19(1-2):91-9. PubMed ID: 18311637
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Comparative assessment of scoring functions on a diverse test set.
    Cheng T; Li X; Li Y; Liu Z; Wang R
    J Chem Inf Model; 2009 Apr; 49(4):1079-93. PubMed ID: 19358517
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. FURSMASA: a new approach to rapid scoring functions that uses a MD-averaged potential energy grid and a solvent-accessible surface area term with parameters GA fit to experimental data.
    Pearlman DA; Rao BG; Charifson P
    Proteins; 2008 May; 71(3):1519-38. PubMed ID: 18300249
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Substituting random forest for multiple linear regression improves binding affinity prediction of scoring functions: Cyscore as a case study.
    Li H; Leung KS; Wong MH; Ballester PJ
    BMC Bioinformatics; 2014 Aug; 15(1):291. PubMed ID: 25159129
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. HotLig: a molecular surface-directed approach to scoring protein-ligand interactions.
    Wang SH; Wu YT; Kuo SC; Yu J
    J Chem Inf Model; 2013 Aug; 53(8):2181-95. PubMed ID: 23862697
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Forging the Basis for Developing Protein-Ligand Interaction Scoring Functions.
    Liu Z; Su M; Han L; Liu J; Yang Q; Li Y; Wang R
    Acc Chem Res; 2017 Feb; 50(2):302-309. PubMed ID: 28182403
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. A comparative assessment of ranking accuracies of conventional and machine-learning-based scoring functions for protein-ligand binding affinity prediction.
    Ashtawy HM; Mahapatra NR
    IEEE/ACM Trans Comput Biol Bioinform; 2012; 9(5):1301-13. PubMed ID: 22411892
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Inclusion of solvation and entropy in the knowledge-based scoring function for protein-ligand interactions.
    Huang SY; Zou X
    J Chem Inf Model; 2010 Feb; 50(2):262-73. PubMed ID: 20088605
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. PEARLS: program for energetic analysis of receptor-ligand system.
    Han LY; Lin HH; Li ZR; Zheng CJ; Cao ZW; Xie B; Chen YZ
    J Chem Inf Model; 2006; 46(1):445-50. PubMed ID: 16426079
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. The development of a simple empirical scoring function to estimate the binding constant for a protein-ligand complex of known three-dimensional structure.
    Böhm HJ
    J Comput Aided Mol Des; 1994 Jun; 8(3):243-56. PubMed ID: 7964925
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. MM/GBSA binding energy prediction on the PDBbind data set: successes, failures, and directions for further improvement.
    Greenidge PA; Kramer C; Mozziconacci JC; Wolf RM
    J Chem Inf Model; 2013 Jan; 53(1):201-9. PubMed ID: 23268595
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. GalaxyDock BP2 score: a hybrid scoring function for accurate protein-ligand docking.
    Baek M; Shin WH; Chung HW; Seok C
    J Comput Aided Mol Des; 2017 Jul; 31(7):653-666. PubMed ID: 28623486
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. A continuum model for protein-protein interactions: application to the docking problem.
    Jackson RM; Sternberg MJ
    J Mol Biol; 1995 Jul; 250(2):258-75. PubMed ID: 7541840
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Knowledge-based scoring functions in drug design: 3. A two-dimensional knowledge-based hydrogen-bonding potential for the prediction of protein-ligand interactions.
    Zheng M; Xiong B; Luo C; Li S; Liu X; Shen Q; Li J; Zhu W; Luo X; Jiang H
    J Chem Inf Model; 2011 Nov; 51(11):2994-3004. PubMed ID: 21999432
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. K
    Jiménez J; Škalič M; Martínez-Rosell G; De Fabritiis G
    J Chem Inf Model; 2018 Feb; 58(2):287-296. PubMed ID: 29309725
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. A Hybrid Knowledge-Based and Empirical Scoring Function for Protein-Ligand Interaction: SMoG2016.
    Debroise T; Shakhnovich EI; Chéron N
    J Chem Inf Model; 2017 Mar; 57(3):584-593. PubMed ID: 28191941
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 8.