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 *

127 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 25490550)

  • 1. A new scoring function for protein-protein docking that identifies native structures with unprecedented accuracy.
    Moreira IS; Martins JM; Coimbra JT; Ramos MJ; Fernandes PA
    Phys Chem Chem Phys; 2015 Jan; 17(4):2378-87. PubMed ID: 25490550
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Properties that rank protein:protein docking poses with high accuracy.
    Simões ICM; Coimbra JTS; Neves RPP; Costa IPD; Ramos MJ; Fernandes PA
    Phys Chem Chem Phys; 2018 Aug; 20(32):20927-20942. PubMed ID: 30067268
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Target-specific native/decoy pose classifier improves the accuracy of ligand ranking in the CSAR 2013 benchmark.
    Fourches D; Politi R; Tropsha A
    J Chem Inf Model; 2015 Jan; 55(1):63-71. PubMed ID: 25521713
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Accurate Prediction of Docked Protein Structure Similarity.
    Akbal-Delibas B; Pomplun M; Haspel N
    J Comput Biol; 2015 Sep; 22(9):892-904. PubMed ID: 26335807
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. iScore: a novel graph kernel-based function for scoring protein-protein docking models.
    Geng C; Jung Y; Renaud N; Honavar V; Bonvin AMJJ; Xue LC
    Bioinformatics; 2020 Jan; 36(1):112-121. PubMed ID: 31199455
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Machine-learning scoring functions for identifying native poses of ligands docked to known and novel proteins.
    Ashtawy HM; Mahapatra NR
    BMC Bioinformatics; 2015; 16 Suppl 6(Suppl 6):S3. PubMed ID: 25916860
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. A novel method for scoring of docked protein complexes using predicted protein-protein binding sites.
    Gottschalk KE; Neuvirth H; Schreiber G
    Protein Eng Des Sel; 2004 Feb; 17(2):183-9. PubMed ID: 15007163
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. VORFFIP-driven dock: V-D2OCK, a fast and accurate protein docking strategy.
    Segura J; Marín-López MA; Jones PF; Oliva B; Fernandez-Fuentes N
    PLoS One; 2015; 10(3):e0118107. PubMed ID: 25763838
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Structural interface parameters are discriminatory in recognising near-native poses of protein-protein interactions.
    Malhotra S; Sankar K; Sowdhamini R
    PLoS One; 2014; 9(2):e80255. PubMed ID: 24498255
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. iATTRACT: simultaneous global and local interface optimization for protein-protein docking refinement.
    Schindler CE; de Vries SJ; Zacharias M
    Proteins; 2015 Feb; 83(2):248-58. PubMed ID: 25402278
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. 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]  

  • 12. DOCKSCORE: a webserver for ranking protein-protein docked poses.
    Malhotra S; Mathew OK; Sowdhamini R
    BMC Bioinformatics; 2015 Apr; 16(1):127. PubMed ID: 25902779
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Rapid Design of Knowledge-Based Scoring Potentials for Enrichment of Near-Native Geometries in Protein-Protein Docking.
    Sasse A; de Vries SJ; Schindler CE; de Beauchêne IC; Zacharias M
    PLoS One; 2017; 12(1):e0170625. PubMed ID: 28118389
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Computational method to identify druggable binding sites that target protein-protein interactions.
    Li H; Kasam V; Tautermann CS; Seeliger D; Vaidehi N
    J Chem Inf Model; 2014 May; 54(5):1391-400. PubMed ID: 24762202
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. BALLDock/SLICK: a new method for protein-carbohydrate docking.
    Kerzmann A; Fuhrmann J; Kohlbacher O; Neumann D
    J Chem Inf Model; 2008 Aug; 48(8):1616-25. PubMed ID: 18646839
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. idDock+: Integrating Machine Learning in Probabilistic Search for Protein-Protein Docking.
    Hashmi I; Shehu A
    J Comput Biol; 2015 Sep; 22(9):806-22. PubMed ID: 26222714
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. BiGGER: a new (soft) docking algorithm for predicting protein interactions.
    Palma PN; Krippahl L; Wampler JE; Moura JJ
    Proteins; 2000 Jun; 39(4):372-84. PubMed ID: 10813819
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Choosing the Optimal Rigid Receptor for Docking and Scoring in the CSAR 2013/2014 Experiment.
    Baumgartner MP; Camacho CJ
    J Chem Inf Model; 2016 Jun; 56(6):1004-12. PubMed ID: 26222931
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Scoring by intermolecular pairwise propensities of exposed residues (SIPPER): a new efficient potential for protein-protein docking.
    Pons C; Talavera D; de la Cruz X; Orozco M; Fernandez-Recio J
    J Chem Inf Model; 2011 Feb; 51(2):370-7. PubMed ID: 21214199
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. The consequences of scoring docked ligand conformations using free energy correlations.
    Spyrakis F; Amadasi A; Fornabaio M; Abraham DJ; Mozzarelli A; Kellogg GE; Cozzini P
    Eur J Med Chem; 2007 Jul; 42(7):921-33. PubMed ID: 17346861
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 7.