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 *

374 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 28816025)

  • 1. Aromatic interactions at the ligand-protein interface: Implications for the development of docking scoring functions.
    Brylinski M
    Chem Biol Drug Des; 2018 Feb; 91(2):380-390. PubMed ID: 28816025
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Oxygen-aromatic contacts in intra-strand base pairs: analysis of high-resolution DNA crystal structures and quantum chemical calculations.
    Jain A; Krishna Deepak RNV; Sankararamakrishnan R
    J Struct Biol; 2014 Jul; 187(1):49-57. PubMed ID: 24816369
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. 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]  

  • 4. Conformational Preferences of π-π Stacking Between Ligand and Protein, Analysis Derived from Crystal Structure Data Geometric Preference of π-π Interaction.
    Zhao Y; Li J; Gu H; Wei D; Xu YC; Fu W; Yu Z
    Interdiscip Sci; 2015 Sep; 7(3):211-20. PubMed ID: 26370211
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Amino acid analogues bind to carbon nanotube via π-π interactions: comparison of molecular mechanical and quantum mechanical calculations.
    Yang Z; Wang Z; Tian X; Xiu P; Zhou R
    J Chem Phys; 2012 Jan; 136(2):025103. PubMed ID: 22260616
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. SAnDReS: A Computational Tool for Docking.
    Bitencourt-Ferreira G; de Azevedo WF
    Methods Mol Biol; 2019; 2053():51-65. PubMed ID: 31452098
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. AA-Score: a New Scoring Function Based on Amino Acid-Specific Interaction for Molecular Docking.
    Pan X; Wang H; Zhang Y; Wang X; Li C; Ji C; Zhang JZH
    J Chem Inf Model; 2022 May; 62(10):2499-2509. PubMed ID: 35452230
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Quantifying the π-Stacking Interactions in Nitroarene Binding Sites of Proteins.
    An Y; Bloom JW; Wheeler SE
    J Phys Chem B; 2015 Nov; 119(45):14441-50. PubMed ID: 26491883
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Electrostatic Energy in Protein-Ligand Complexes.
    Bitencourt-Ferreira G; Veit-Acosta M; de Azevedo WF
    Methods Mol Biol; 2019; 2053():67-77. PubMed ID: 31452099
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. The aromatic stacking interactions between proteins and their macromolecular ligands.
    Rahman MM; Muhseen ZT; Junaid M; Zhang H
    Curr Protein Pept Sci; 2015; 16(6):502-12. PubMed ID: 26138814
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Protein-Ligand CH-π Interactions: Structural Informatics, Energy Function Development, and Docking Implementation.
    Xiao Y; Woods RJ
    J Chem Theory Comput; 2023 Aug; 19(16):5503-5515. PubMed ID: 37493980
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Molecular Docking Simulations with ArgusLab.
    Bitencourt-Ferreira G; de Azevedo WF
    Methods Mol Biol; 2019; 2053():203-220. PubMed ID: 31452107
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Carbohydrate-aromatic interactions.
    Asensio JL; Ardá A; Cañada FJ; Jiménez-Barbero J
    Acc Chem Res; 2013 Apr; 46(4):946-54. PubMed ID: 22704792
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Analysis of non-covalent interactions in (bio)organic molecules using orbital-partitioned localized MP2.
    Grimme S; Mück-Lichtenfeld C; Antony J
    Phys Chem Chem Phys; 2008 Jun; 10(23):3327-34. PubMed ID: 18535714
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Detecting the native ligand orientation by interfacial rigidity: SiteInterlock.
    Raschka S; Bemister-Buffington J; Kuhn LA
    Proteins; 2016 Dec; 84(12):1888-1901. PubMed ID: 27699847
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Improving binding mode and binding affinity predictions of docking by ligand-based search of protein conformations: evaluation in D3R grand challenge 2015.
    Xu X; Yan C; Zou X
    J Comput Aided Mol Des; 2017 Aug; 31(8):689-699. PubMed ID: 28668990
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Computational design of protein-small molecule interfaces.
    Allison B; Combs S; DeLuca S; Lemmon G; Mizoue L; Meiler J
    J Struct Biol; 2014 Feb; 185(2):193-202. PubMed ID: 23962892
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Forging the Basis for Developing Protein-Ligand Interaction Scoring Functions.
    Liu Z; Su M; Han L; Liu J; Yang Q; Li Y; Wang R
    Acc Chem Res; 2017 Feb; 50(2):302-309. PubMed ID: 28182403
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. [Classification and Contribution Analysis of Aromatic Clusters in Protein-Ligand Complexes].
    Yamasaki H; Koseki J; Nishibata Y; Hirono S
    Yakugaku Zasshi; 2016; 136(1):97-9. PubMed ID: 26725675
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Structural artifacts in protein-ligand X-ray structures: implications for the development of docking scoring functions.
    Søndergaard CR; Garrett AE; Carstensen T; Pollastri G; Nielsen JE
    J Med Chem; 2009 Sep; 52(18):5673-84. PubMed ID: 19711919
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 19.