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 *

91 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 27481029)

  • 21. Modeling phospholipidosis induction: reliability and warnings.
    Goracci L; Ceccarelli M; Bonelli D; Cruciani G
    J Chem Inf Model; 2013 Jun; 53(6):1436-46. PubMed ID: 23692521
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 22. Best Practices for QSAR Model Development, Validation, and Exploitation.
    Tropsha A
    Mol Inform; 2010 Jul; 29(6-7):476-88. PubMed ID: 27463326
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 23. QSAR modeling of mono- and bis-quaternary ammonium salts that act as antagonists at neuronal nicotinic acetylcholine receptors mediating dopamine release.
    Zheng F; Bayram E; Sumithran SP; Ayers JT; Zhan CG; Schmitt JD; Dwoskin LP; Crooks PA
    Bioorg Med Chem; 2006 May; 14(9):3017-37. PubMed ID: 16431111
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 24. Combined 3D-QSAR modeling and molecular docking study on indolinone derivatives as inhibitors of 3-phosphoinositide-dependent protein kinase-1.
    AbdulHameed MD; Hamza A; Liu J; Zhan CG
    J Chem Inf Model; 2008 Sep; 48(9):1760-72. PubMed ID: 18717540
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 25. High content screening analysis of phospholipidosis: validation of a 96-well assay with CHO-K1 and HepG2 cells for the prediction of in vivo based phospholipidosis.
    van de Water FM; Havinga J; Ravesloot WT; Horbach GJ; Schoonen WG
    Toxicol In Vitro; 2011 Dec; 25(8):1870-82. PubMed ID: 21651975
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 26. On the number of EINECS compounds that can be covered by (Q)SAR models for acute toxicity.
    Zvinavashe E; Murk AJ; Rietjens IM
    Toxicol Lett; 2009 Jan; 184(1):67-72. PubMed ID: 19041378
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 27. Application of in silico modelling to estimate toxicity of migrating substances from food packaging.
    Price N; Chaudhry Q
    Food Chem Toxicol; 2014 Sep; 71():136-41. PubMed ID: 24923263
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 28. Unified QSAR approach to antimicrobials. 4. Multi-target QSAR modeling and comparative multi-distance study of the giant components of antiviral drug-drug complex networks.
    Prado-Prado FJ; Martinez de la Vega O; Uriarte E; Ubeira FM; Chou KC; González-Díaz H
    Bioorg Med Chem; 2009 Jan; 17(2):569-75. PubMed ID: 19112024
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 29. Building on a solid foundation: SAR and QSAR as a fundamental strategy to reduce animal testing.
    Sullivan KM; Manuppello JR; Willett CE
    SAR QSAR Environ Res; 2014; 25(5):357-65. PubMed ID: 24773450
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 30. Informing mechanistic toxicology with computational molecular models.
    Goldsmith MR; Peterson SD; Chang DT; Transue TR; Tornero-Velez R; Tan YM; Dary CC
    Methods Mol Biol; 2012; 929():139-65. PubMed ID: 23007429
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 31. Comparison of in silico models for prediction of mutagenicity.
    Bakhtyari NG; Raitano G; Benfenati E; Martin T; Young D
    J Environ Sci Health C Environ Carcinog Ecotoxicol Rev; 2013; 31(1):45-66. PubMed ID: 23534394
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 32. Integration of structure-activity relationship and artificial intelligence systems to improve in silico prediction of ames test mutagenicity.
    Mazzatorta P; Tran LA; Schilter B; Grigorov M
    J Chem Inf Model; 2007; 47(1):34-8. PubMed ID: 17238246
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 33. Three new consensus QSAR models for the prediction of Ames genotoxicity.
    Votano JR; Parham M; Hall LH; Kier LB; Oloff S; Tropsha A; Xie Q; Tong W
    Mutagenesis; 2004 Sep; 19(5):365-77. PubMed ID: 15388809
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 34. Metabolic biotransformation half-lives in fish: QSAR modeling and consensus analysis.
    Papa E; van der Wal L; Arnot JA; Gramatica P
    Sci Total Environ; 2014 Feb; 470-471():1040-6. PubMed ID: 24239825
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 35. In silico models for predicting ready biodegradability under REACH: a comparative study.
    Pizzo F; Lombardo A; Manganaro A; Benfenati E
    Sci Total Environ; 2013 Oct; 463-464():161-8. PubMed ID: 23796884
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 36. Experiences with the application of QSAR in the routine of the notification procedure.
    Lange AW; Vormann K
    SAR QSAR Environ Res; 1995; 3(3):171-7. PubMed ID: 8564853
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 37. Multispecies QSAR modeling for predicting the aquatic toxicity of diverse organic chemicals for regulatory toxicology.
    Singh KP; Gupta S; Kumar A; Mohan D
    Chem Res Toxicol; 2014 May; 27(5):741-53. PubMed ID: 24738471
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 38. Combined 3D-QSAR modeling and molecular docking study on 1,4-dihydroindeno[1,2-c]pyrazoles as VEGFR-2 kinase inhibitors.
    Zeng H; Zhang H
    J Mol Graph Model; 2010 Aug; 29(1):54-71. PubMed ID: 20471293
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 39. Promises and pitfalls of quantitative structure-activity relationship approaches for predicting metabolism and toxicity.
    Zvinavashe E; Murk AJ; Rietjens IM
    Chem Res Toxicol; 2008 Dec; 21(12):2229-36. PubMed ID: 19548346
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 40. Systematic computational analysis of structure-activity relationships: concepts, challenges and recent advances.
    Peltason L; Bajorath J
    Future Med Chem; 2009 Jun; 1(3):451-66. PubMed ID: 21426126
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Previous]   [Next]    [New Search]
    of 5.