109 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 28412403)
1. A further development of the QNAR model to predict the cellular uptake of nanoparticles by pancreatic cancer cells.
Luan F; Tang L; Zhang L; Zhang S; Monteagudo MC; Cordeiro MNDS
Food Chem Toxicol; 2018 Feb; 112():571-580. PubMed ID: 28412403
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Comparative study of predictive computational models for nanoparticle-induced cytotoxicity.
Sayes C; Ivanov I
Risk Anal; 2010 Nov; 30(11):1723-34. PubMed ID: 20561263
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Exploring quantitative nanostructure-activity relationships (QNAR) modeling as a tool for predicting biological effects of manufactured nanoparticles.
Fourches D; Pu D; Tropsha A
Comb Chem High Throughput Screen; 2011 Mar; 14(3):217-25. PubMed ID: 21275889
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Quantitative nanostructure-activity relationship modeling.
Fourches D; Pu D; Tassa C; Weissleder R; Shaw SY; Mumper RJ; Tropsha A
ACS Nano; 2010 Oct; 4(10):5703-12. PubMed ID: 20857979
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. QSPR modeling of soil sorption coefficients (K(OC)) of pesticides using SPA-ANN and SPA-MLR.
Goudarzi N; Goodarzi M; Araujo MC; Galvão RK
J Agric Food Chem; 2009 Aug; 57(15):7153-8. PubMed ID: 19722589
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Comparison of Multiple Linear Regressions and Neural Networks based QSAR models for the design of new antitubercular compounds.
Ventura C; Latino DA; Martins F
Eur J Med Chem; 2013; 70():831-45. PubMed ID: 24246731
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Perspectives from the NanoSafety Modelling Cluster on the validation criteria for (Q)SAR models used in nanotechnology.
Puzyn T; Jeliazkova N; Sarimveis H; Marchese Robinson RL; Lobaskin V; Rallo R; Richarz AN; Gajewicz A; Papadopulos MG; Hastings J; Cronin MTD; Benfenati E; Fernández A
Food Chem Toxicol; 2018 Feb; 112():478-494. PubMed ID: 28943385
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Benchmarking of linear and nonlinear approaches for quantitative structure-property relationship studies of metal complexation with ionophores.
Tetko IV; Solov'ev VP; Antonov AV; Yao X; Doucet JP; Fan B; Hoonakker F; Fourches D; Jost P; Lachiche N; Varnek A
J Chem Inf Model; 2006; 46(2):808-19. PubMed ID: 16563012
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Nano-quantitative structure-activity relationship modeling using easily computable and interpretable descriptors for uptake of magnetofluorescent engineered nanoparticles in pancreatic cancer cells.
Kar S; Gajewicz A; Puzyn T; Roy K
Toxicol In Vitro; 2014 Jun; 28(4):600-6. PubMed ID: 24412539
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. In silico prediction of dermal penetration rate of chemicals from their molecular structural descriptors.
Fatemi MH; Malekzadeh H
Environ Toxicol Pharmacol; 2012 Sep; 34(2):297-306. PubMed ID: 22659232
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Anticancer activity of selected phenolic compounds: QSAR studies using ridge regression and neural networks.
Nandi S; Vracko M; Bagchi MC
Chem Biol Drug Des; 2007 Nov; 70(5):424-36. PubMed ID: 17949360
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. QSPR studies of impact sensitivity of nitro energetic compounds using three-dimensional descriptors.
Xu J; Zhu L; Fang D; Wang L; Xiao S; Liu L; Xu W
J Mol Graph Model; 2012 Jun; 36():10-9. PubMed ID: 22503858
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. The cytotoxicity of nanomaterials: Modeling multiple human cells uptake of functionalized magneto-fluorescent nanoparticles via nano-QSAR.
Qi R; Pan Y; Cao J; Jia Z; Jiang J
Chemosphere; 2020 Jun; 249():126175. PubMed ID: 32078856
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. QSAR models for predicting the toxicity of piperidine derivatives against Aedes aegypti.
Doucet JP; Papa E; Doucet-Panaye A; Devillers J
SAR QSAR Environ Res; 2017 Jun; 28(6):451-470. PubMed ID: 28604113
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Predicting the Physicochemical Properties and Biological Activities of Monolayer-Protected Gold Nanoparticles Using Simulation-Derived Descriptors.
Chew AK; Pedersen JA; Van Lehn RC
ACS Nano; 2022 Apr; 16(4):6282-6292. PubMed ID: 35289596
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Modelling and predicting the biological effects of nanomaterials.
Winkler DA; Burden FR; Yan B; Weissleder R; Tassa C; Shaw S; Epa VC
SAR QSAR Environ Res; 2014; 25(2):161-72. PubMed ID: 24625316
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Comparative study of QSAR/QSPR correlations using support vector machines, radial basis function neural networks, and multiple linear regression.
Yao XJ; Panaye A; Doucet JP; Zhang RS; Chen HF; Liu MC; Hu ZD; Fan BT
J Chem Inf Comput Sci; 2004; 44(4):1257-66. PubMed ID: 15272833
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Quantitative predictions of gas chromatography retention indexes with support vector machines, radial basis neural networks and multiple linear regression.
Chen HF
Anal Chim Acta; 2008 Feb; 609(1):24-36. PubMed ID: 18243870
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. QNAR modeling of cytotoxicity of mixing nano-TiO
Yuan B; Wang P; Sang L; Gong J; Pan Y; Hu Y
Ecotoxicol Environ Saf; 2021 Jan; 208():111634. PubMed ID: 33396154
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. A self-adaptive genetic algorithm-artificial neural network algorithm with leave-one-out cross validation for descriptor selection in QSAR study.
Wu J; Mei J; Wen S; Liao S; Chen J; Shen Y
J Comput Chem; 2010 Jul; 31(10):1956-68. PubMed ID: 20512843
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
