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 *

158 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 26958710)

  • 61. REPROVIS-DB: a benchmark system for ligand-based virtual screening derived from reproducible prospective applications.
    Ripphausen P; Wassermann AM; Bajorath J
    J Chem Inf Model; 2011 Oct; 51(10):2467-73. PubMed ID: 21902278
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 62. Community benchmarks for virtual screening.
    Irwin JJ
    J Comput Aided Mol Des; 2008; 22(3-4):193-9. PubMed ID: 18273555
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 63. Considerations in compound database preparation--"hidden" impact on virtual screening results.
    Knox AJ; Meegan MJ; Carta G; Lloyd DG
    J Chem Inf Model; 2005; 45(6):1908-19. PubMed ID: 16309298
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 64. Homology model-based virtual screening for GPCR ligands using docking and target-biased scoring.
    Radestock S; Weil T; Renner S
    J Chem Inf Model; 2008 May; 48(5):1104-17. PubMed ID: 18442221
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 65. Extensive consensus docking evaluation for ligand pose prediction and virtual screening studies.
    Tuccinardi T; Poli G; Romboli V; Giordano A; Martinelli A
    J Chem Inf Model; 2014 Oct; 54(10):2980-6. PubMed ID: 25211541
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 66. Investigation of MM-PBSA rescoring of docking poses.
    Thompson DC; Humblet C; Joseph-McCarthy D
    J Chem Inf Model; 2008 May; 48(5):1081-91. PubMed ID: 18465849
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 67. 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]  

  • 68. Structure-based computational approaches for small-molecule modulation of protein-protein interactions.
    Xu D; Wang B; Meroueh SO
    Methods Mol Biol; 2015; 1278():77-92. PubMed ID: 25859944
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 69. Ligand-steered modeling and docking: A benchmarking study in class A G-protein-coupled receptors.
    Phatak SS; Gatica EA; Cavasotto CN
    J Chem Inf Model; 2010 Dec; 50(12):2119-28. PubMed ID: 21080692
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 70. Structure-based virtual screening of MT2 melatonin receptor: influence of template choice and structural refinement.
    Pala D; Beuming T; Sherman W; Lodola A; Rivara S; Mor M
    J Chem Inf Model; 2013 Apr; 53(4):821-35. PubMed ID: 23541165
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 71. Alternative quality assessment strategy to compare performances of GPCR-ligand docking protocols: the human adenosine A(2A) receptor as a case study.
    Ciancetta A; Cuzzolin A; Moro S
    J Chem Inf Model; 2014 Aug; 54(8):2243-54. PubMed ID: 25046649
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 72. Comparative Assessment of Seven Docking Programs on a Nonredundant Metalloprotein Subset of the PDBbind Refined.
    Çınaroğlu SS; Timuçin E
    J Chem Inf Model; 2019 Sep; 59(9):3846-3859. PubMed ID: 31460757
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 73. Novel inhibitor discovery through virtual screening against multiple protein conformations generated via ligand-directed modeling: a maternal embryonic leucine zipper kinase example.
    Mahasenan KV; Li C
    J Chem Inf Model; 2012 May; 52(5):1345-55. PubMed ID: 22540736
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 74. Complementarity between in silico and biophysical screening approaches in fragment-based lead discovery against the A(2A) adenosine receptor.
    Chen D; Ranganathan A; IJzerman AP; Siegal G; Carlsson J
    J Chem Inf Model; 2013 Oct; 53(10):2701-14. PubMed ID: 23971943
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 75. From heptahelical bundle to hits from the Haystack: structure-based virtual screening for GPCR ligands.
    Kooistra AJ; Roumen L; Leurs R; de Esch IJ; de Graaf C
    Methods Enzymol; 2013; 522():279-336. PubMed ID: 23374191
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 76. GPCRLigNet: rapid screening for GPCR active ligands using machine learning.
    Remington JM; McKay KT; Beckage NB; Ferrell JB; Schneebeli ST; Li J
    J Comput Aided Mol Des; 2023 Mar; 37(3):147-156. PubMed ID: 36840893
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 77. Ligand- and receptor-based docking with LiBELa.
    dos Santos Muniz H; Nascimento AS
    J Comput Aided Mol Des; 2015 Aug; 29(8):713-23. PubMed ID: 26141308
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 78. A Hybrid Approach to Structure and Function Modeling of G Protein-Coupled Receptors.
    Latek D; Bajda M; Filipek S
    J Chem Inf Model; 2016 Apr; 56(4):630-41. PubMed ID: 26978043
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 79. Molecular docking to flexible targets.
    Sørensen J; Demir Ö; Swift RV; Feher VA; Amaro RE
    Methods Mol Biol; 2015; 1215():445-69. PubMed ID: 25330975
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 80. Computational methods for studying G protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs).
    Kaczor AA; Rutkowska E; Bartuzi D; Targowska-Duda KM; Matosiuk D; Selent J
    Methods Cell Biol; 2016; 132():359-99. PubMed ID: 26928552
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Previous]   [Next]    [New Search]
    of 8.