221 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 28137238)
1. A Practical Guide to Molecular Docking and Homology Modelling for Medicinal Chemists.
Lohning AE; Levonis SM; Williams-Noonan B; Schweiker SS
Curr Top Med Chem; 2017; 17(18):2023-2040. PubMed ID: 28137238
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Molecular docking of intercalators and groove-binders to nucleic acids using Autodock and Surflex.
Holt PA; Chaires JB; Trent JO
J Chem Inf Model; 2008 Aug; 48(8):1602-15. PubMed ID: 18642866
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Benchmarking GPCR homology model template selection in combination with de novo loop generation.
Szwabowski GL; Castleman PN; Sears CK; Wink LH; Cole JA; Baker DL; Parrill AL
J Comput Aided Mol Des; 2020 Oct; 34(10):1027-1044. PubMed ID: 32737667
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. An Automated Strategy for Binding-Pose Selection and Docking Assessment in Structure-Based Drug Design.
Ballante F; Marshall GR
J Chem Inf Model; 2016 Jan; 56(1):54-72. PubMed ID: 26682916
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. 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]
6. Comparison of several molecular docking programs: pose prediction and virtual screening accuracy.
Cross JB; Thompson DC; Rai BK; Baber JC; Fan KY; Hu Y; Humblet C
J Chem Inf Model; 2009 Jun; 49(6):1455-74. PubMed ID: 19476350
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. 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]
8. A python-based docking program utilizing a receptor bound ligand shape: PythDock.
Chung JY; Cho SJ; Hah JM
Arch Pharm Res; 2011 Sep; 34(9):1451-8. PubMed ID: 21975806
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. 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]
10. 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]
11. Surflex: fully automatic flexible molecular docking using a molecular similarity-based search engine.
Jain AN
J Med Chem; 2003 Feb; 46(4):499-511. PubMed ID: 12570372
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Highly Flexible Ligand Docking: Benchmarking of the DockThor Program on the LEADS-PEP Protein-Peptide Data Set.
Santos KB; Guedes IA; Karl ALM; Dardenne LE
J Chem Inf Model; 2020 Feb; 60(2):667-683. PubMed ID: 31922754
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Surflex-Dock: Docking benchmarks and real-world application.
Spitzer R; Jain AN
J Comput Aided Mol Des; 2012 Jun; 26(6):687-99. PubMed ID: 22569590
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. 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]
15. 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]
16. How Good Are Current Docking Programs at Nucleic Acid-Ligand Docking? A Comprehensive Evaluation.
Jiang D; Zhao H; Du H; Deng Y; Wu Z; Wang J; Zeng Y; Zhang H; Wang X; Wu J; Hsieh CY; Hou T
J Chem Theory Comput; 2023 Aug; 19(16):5633-5647. PubMed ID: 37480347
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. FlexE: efficient molecular docking considering protein structure variations.
Claussen H; Buning C; Rarey M; Lengauer T
J Mol Biol; 2001 Apr; 308(2):377-95. PubMed ID: 11327774
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Beware of machine learning-based scoring functions-on the danger of developing black boxes.
Gabel J; Desaphy J; Rognan D
J Chem Inf Model; 2014 Oct; 54(10):2807-15. PubMed ID: 25207678
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. 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]
20. Similarity-driven flexible ligand docking.
Fradera X; Knegtel RM; Mestres J
Proteins; 2000 Sep; 40(4):623-36. PubMed ID: 10899786
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
