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 *

460 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 29710787)

  • 21. Docking studies on DNA intercalators.
    Gilad Y; Senderowitz H
    J Chem Inf Model; 2014 Jan; 54(1):96-107. PubMed ID: 24303988
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 22. Boosting Pose Ranking Performance via Rescoring with MM-GBSA.
    Greenidge PA; Lewis RA; Ertl P
    Chem Biol Drug Des; 2016 Sep; 88(3):317-28. PubMed ID: 27061970
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 23. 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]  

  • 24. A fully differentiable ligand pose optimization framework guided by deep learning and a traditional scoring function.
    Wang Z; Zheng L; Wang S; Lin M; Wang Z; Kong AW; Mu Y; Wei Y; Li W
    Brief Bioinform; 2023 Jan; 24(1):. PubMed ID: 36502369
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 25. 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]  

  • 26. The scoring bias in reverse docking and the score normalization strategy to improve success rate of target fishing.
    Luo Q; Zhao L; Hu J; Jin H; Liu Z; Zhang L
    PLoS One; 2017; 12(2):e0171433. PubMed ID: 28196116
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 27. ConsDock: A new program for the consensus analysis of protein-ligand interactions.
    Paul N; Rognan D
    Proteins; 2002 Jun; 47(4):521-33. PubMed ID: 12001231
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 28. FDA approved drugs complexed to their targets: evaluating pose prediction accuracy of docking protocols.
    Bohari MH; Sastry GN
    J Mol Model; 2012 Sep; 18(9):4263-74. PubMed ID: 22562231
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 29. Supervised consensus scoring for docking and virtual screening.
    Teramoto R; Fukunishi H
    J Chem Inf Model; 2007; 47(2):526-34. PubMed ID: 17295466
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 30. Evaluation of Protein-Ligand Docking by Cyscore.
    Cao Y; Dai W; Miao Z
    Methods Mol Biol; 2018; 1762():233-243. PubMed ID: 29594775
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 31. Structure-Based Site of Metabolism (SOM) Prediction of Ligand for CYP3A4 Enzyme: Comparison of Glide XP and Induced Fit Docking (IFD).
    Lokwani DK; Sarkate AP; Karnik KS; Nikalje APG; Seijas JA
    Molecules; 2020 Apr; 25(7):. PubMed ID: 32244772
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 32. Using AutoDock for ligand-receptor docking.
    Morris GM; Huey R; Olson AJ
    Curr Protoc Bioinformatics; 2008 Dec; Chapter 8():Unit 8.14. PubMed ID: 19085980
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 33. Virtual fragment docking by Glide: a validation study on 190 protein-fragment complexes.
    Sándor M; Kiss R; Keseru GM
    J Chem Inf Model; 2010 Jun; 50(6):1165-72. PubMed ID: 20459088
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 34. DrugScore(CSD)-knowledge-based scoring function derived from small molecule crystal data with superior recognition rate of near-native ligand poses and better affinity prediction.
    Velec HF; Gohlke H; Klebe G
    J Med Chem; 2005 Oct; 48(20):6296-303. PubMed ID: 16190756
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 35. The consequences of scoring docked ligand conformations using free energy correlations.
    Spyrakis F; Amadasi A; Fornabaio M; Abraham DJ; Mozzarelli A; Kellogg GE; Cozzini P
    Eur J Med Chem; 2007 Jul; 42(7):921-33. PubMed ID: 17346861
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 36. Structure-based virtual screening with supervised consensus scoring: evaluation of pose prediction and enrichment factors.
    Teramoto R; Fukunishi H
    J Chem Inf Model; 2008 Apr; 48(4):747-54. PubMed ID: 18318474
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 37. Ensemble docking of multiple protein structures: considering protein structural variations in molecular docking.
    Huang SY; Zou X
    Proteins; 2007 Feb; 66(2):399-421. PubMed ID: 17096427
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 38. An alternative method for the evaluation of docking performance: RSR vs RMSD.
    Yusuf D; Davis AM; Kleywegt GJ; Schmitt S
    J Chem Inf Model; 2008 Jul; 48(7):1411-22. PubMed ID: 18598022
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 39. An interaction-motif-based scoring function for protein-ligand docking.
    Xie ZR; Hwang MJ
    BMC Bioinformatics; 2010 Jun; 11():298. PubMed ID: 20525216
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 40. Prediction of multiple binding modes of the CDK2 inhibitors, anilinopyrazoles, using the automated docking programs GOLD, FlexX, and LigandFit: an evaluation of performance.
    Sato H; Shewchuk LM; Tang J
    J Chem Inf Model; 2006; 46(6):2552-62. PubMed ID: 17125195
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Previous]   [Next]    [New Search]
    of 23.