139 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 29017921)
41. Free-energy-based methods for binding profile determination in a congeneric series of CDK2 inhibitors.
Fidelak J; Juraszek J; Branduardi D; Bianciotto M; Gervasio FL
J Phys Chem B; 2010 Jul; 114(29):9516-24. PubMed ID: 20593892
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
42. Improving AutoDock Vina Using Random Forest: The Growing Accuracy of Binding Affinity Prediction by the Effective Exploitation of Larger Data Sets.
Li H; Leung KS; Wong MH; Ballester PJ
Mol Inform; 2015 Feb; 34(2-3):115-26. PubMed ID: 27490034
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
43. 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]
44. Addressing limitations with the MM-GB/SA scoring procedure using the WaterMap method and free energy perturbation calculations.
Guimarães CR; Mathiowetz AM
J Chem Inf Model; 2010 Apr; 50(4):547-59. PubMed ID: 20235592
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
45. Recent advances on structure-informed drug discovery of cyclin-dependent kinase-2 inhibitors.
Duca JS
Future Med Chem; 2009 Nov; 1(8):1453-66. PubMed ID: 21426059
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
46. Machine Learning Classification Models to Improve the Docking-based Screening: A Case of PI3K-Tankyrase Inhibitors.
Berishvili VP; Voronkov AE; Radchenko EV; Palyulin VA
Mol Inform; 2018 Nov; 37(11):e1800030. PubMed ID: 29901257
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
47. Correcting the impact of docking pose generation error on binding affinity prediction.
Li H; Leung KS; Wong MH; Ballester PJ
BMC Bioinformatics; 2016 Sep; 17(Suppl 11):308. PubMed ID: 28185549
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
48. Transferable scoring function based on semiempirical quantum mechanical PM6-DH2 method: CDK2 with 15 structurally diverse inhibitors.
Dobeš P; Fanfrlík J; Rezáč J; Otyepka M; Hobza P
J Comput Aided Mol Des; 2011 Mar; 25(3):223-35. PubMed ID: 21286784
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
49. Evaluation of molecular docking using polynomial empirical scoring functions.
Dias R; Timmers LF; Caceres RA; de Azevedo WF
Curr Drug Targets; 2008 Dec; 9(12):1062-70. PubMed ID: 19128216
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
50. Development of machine learning models to predict inhibition of 3-dehydroquinate dehydratase.
de Ávila MB; de Azevedo WF
Chem Biol Drug Des; 2018 Aug; 92(2):1468-1474. PubMed ID: 29676519
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
51. Triazolo[1,5-a]pyrimidines as novel CDK2 inhibitors: protein structure-guided design and SAR.
Richardson CM; Williamson DS; Parratt MJ; Borgognoni J; Cansfield AD; Dokurno P; Francis GL; Howes R; Moore JD; Murray JB; Robertson A; Surgenor AE; Torrance CJ
Bioorg Med Chem Lett; 2006 Mar; 16(5):1353-7. PubMed ID: 16325401
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
52. Characterization of a Pyrazolo[4,3-d]pyrimidine Inhibitor of Cyclin-Dependent Kinases 2 and 5 and Aurora A With Pro-Apoptotic and Anti-Angiogenic Activity In Vitro.
Řezníčková E; Weitensteiner S; Havlíček L; Jorda R; Gucký T; Berka K; Bazgier V; Zahler S; Kryštof V; Strnad M
Chem Biol Drug Des; 2015 Dec; 86(6):1528-40. PubMed ID: 26198005
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
53. Fusion of Structure and Ligand Based Methods for Identification of Novel CDK2 Inhibitors.
Mahajan P; Chashoo G; Gupta M; Kumar A; Singh PP; Nargotra A
J Chem Inf Model; 2017 Aug; 57(8):1957-1969. PubMed ID: 28723151
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
54. A computational study of the protein-ligand interactions in CDK2 inhibitors: using quantum mechanics/molecular mechanics interaction energy as a predictor of the biological activity.
Alzate-Morales JH; Contreras R; Soriano A; Tuñon I; Silla E
Biophys J; 2007 Jan; 92(2):430-9. PubMed ID: 17085505
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
55. Structure guided inhibitor designing of CDK2 and discovery of potential leads against cancer.
Kumar AV; Mohan K; Riyaz S
J Mol Model; 2013 Sep; 19(9):3581-9. PubMed ID: 23728955
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
56. Design, synthesis, and biological evaluation of novel pyrimidine derivatives as CDK2 inhibitors.
Ibrahim DA; El-Metwally AM
Eur J Med Chem; 2010 Mar; 45(3):1158-66. PubMed ID: 20045222
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
57. Discovery of a novel class of 2-aminopyrimidines as CDK1 and CDK2 inhibitors.
Lee J; Kim KH; Jeong S
Bioorg Med Chem Lett; 2011 Jul; 21(14):4203-5. PubMed ID: 21684737
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
58. A New, Improved Hybrid Scoring Function for Molecular Docking and Scoring Based on AutoDock and AutoDock Vina.
Tanchuk VY; Tanin VO; Vovk AI; Poda G
Chem Biol Drug Des; 2016 Apr; 87(4):618-25. PubMed ID: 26643167
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
59. The effect of a tightly bound water molecule on scaffold diversity in the computer-aided de novo ligand design of CDK2 inhibitors.
García-Sosa AT; Mancera RL
J Mol Model; 2006 Mar; 12(4):422-31. PubMed ID: 16374623
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
60. Use of machine learning approaches for novel drug discovery.
Lima AN; Philot EA; Trossini GH; Scott LP; Maltarollo VG; Honorio KM
Expert Opin Drug Discov; 2016; 11(3):225-39. PubMed ID: 26814169
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Previous] [Next] [New Search]
