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 *

125 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 26492437)

  • 21. Incorporating backbone flexibility in MedusaDock improves ligand-binding pose prediction in the CSAR2011 docking benchmark.
    Ding F; Dokholyan NV
    J Chem Inf Model; 2013 Aug; 53(8):1871-9. PubMed ID: 23237273
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 22. Nonlinear scoring functions for similarity-based ligand docking and binding affinity prediction.
    Brylinski M
    J Chem Inf Model; 2013 Nov; 53(11):3097-112. PubMed ID: 24171431
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 23. Rapid activity prediction of HIV-1 integrase inhibitors: harnessing docking energetic components for empirical scoring by chemometric and artificial neural network approaches.
    Thangsunan P; Kittiwachana S; Meepowpan P; Kungwan N; Prangkio P; Hannongbua S; Suree N
    J Comput Aided Mol Des; 2016 Jun; 30(6):471-88. PubMed ID: 27314501
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 24. Comprehensive evaluation of ten docking programs on a diverse set of protein-ligand complexes: the prediction accuracy of sampling power and scoring power.
    Wang Z; Sun H; Yao X; Li D; Xu L; Li Y; Tian S; Hou T
    Phys Chem Chem Phys; 2016 May; 18(18):12964-75. PubMed ID: 27108770
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 25. Predicting binding affinity of CSAR ligands using both structure-based and ligand-based approaches.
    Fourches D; Muratov E; Ding F; Dokholyan NV; Tropsha A
    J Chem Inf Model; 2013 Aug; 53(8):1915-22. PubMed ID: 23809015
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 26. Automated large-scale file preparation, docking, and scoring: evaluation of ITScore and STScore using the 2012 Community Structure-Activity Resource benchmark.
    Grinter SZ; Yan C; Huang SY; Jiang L; Zou X
    J Chem Inf Model; 2013 Aug; 53(8):1905-14. PubMed ID: 23656179
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 27. Boosting Pose Ranking Performance via Rescoring with MM-GBSA.
    Greenidge PA; Lewis RA; Ertl P
    Chem Biol Drug Des; 2016 Sep; 88(3):317-28. PubMed ID: 27061970
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 28. Comparing sixteen scoring functions for predicting biological activities of ligands for protein targets.
    Xu W; Lucke AJ; Fairlie DP
    J Mol Graph Model; 2015 Apr; 57():76-88. PubMed ID: 25682361
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 29. Prospective evaluation of shape similarity based pose prediction method in D3R Grand Challenge 2015.
    Kumar A; Zhang KY
    J Comput Aided Mol Des; 2016 Sep; 30(9):685-693. PubMed ID: 27484214
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 30. Machine learning in computational docking.
    Khamis MA; Gomaa W; Ahmed WF
    Artif Intell Med; 2015 Mar; 63(3):135-52. PubMed ID: 25724101
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 31. Application of the docking program SOL for CSAR benchmark.
    Sulimov AV; Kutov DC; Oferkin IV; Katkova EV; Sulimov VB
    J Chem Inf Model; 2013 Aug; 53(8):1946-56. PubMed ID: 23829357
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 32. 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]  

  • 33. Continuous Evaluation of Ligand Protein Predictions: A Weekly Community Challenge for Drug Docking.
    Wagner JR; Churas CP; Liu S; Swift RV; Chiu M; Shao C; Feher VA; Burley SK; Gilson MK; Amaro RE
    Structure; 2019 Aug; 27(8):1326-1335.e4. PubMed ID: 31257108
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 34. HarmonyDOCK: the structural analysis of poses in protein-ligand docking.
    Plewczynski D; Philips A; Von Grotthuss M; Rychlewski L; Ginalski K
    J Comput Biol; 2014 Mar; 21(3):247-56. PubMed ID: 21091053
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 35. A detailed comparison of current docking and scoring methods on systems of pharmaceutical relevance.
    Perola E; Walters WP; Charifson PS
    Proteins; 2004 Aug; 56(2):235-49. PubMed ID: 15211508
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 36. Knowledge-guided docking: accurate prospective prediction of bound configurations of novel ligands using Surflex-Dock.
    Cleves AE; Jain AN
    J Comput Aided Mol Des; 2015 Jun; 29(6):485-509. PubMed ID: 25940276
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 37. Towards predictive docking at aminergic G-protein coupled receptors.
    Jakubík J; El-Fakahany EE; Doležal V
    J Mol Model; 2015 Nov; 21(11):284. PubMed ID: 26453085
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 38. DrugScore(CSD)-knowledge-based scoring function derived from small molecule crystal data with superior recognition rate of near-native ligand poses and better affinity prediction.
    Velec HF; Gohlke H; Klebe G
    J Med Chem; 2005 Oct; 48(20):6296-303. PubMed ID: 16190756
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 39. 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]  

  • 40. E-novo: an automated workflow for efficient structure-based lead optimization.
    Pearce BC; Langley DR; Kang J; Huang H; Kulkarni A
    J Chem Inf Model; 2009 Jul; 49(7):1797-809. PubMed ID: 19552372
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Previous]   [Next]    [New Search]
    of 7.