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 *

151 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 31117183)

  • 21. Development of a new benchmark for assessing the scoring functions applicable to protein-protein interactions.
    Han L; Yang Q; Liu Z; Li Y; Wang R
    Future Med Chem; 2018 Jul; 10(13):1555-1574. PubMed ID: 29953245
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 22. In silico fragment-based drug discovery: setup and validation of a fragment-to-lead computational protocol using S4MPLE.
    Hoffer L; Renaud JP; Horvath D
    J Chem Inf Model; 2013 Apr; 53(4):836-51. PubMed ID: 23537132
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 23. Target-specific native/decoy pose classifier improves the accuracy of ligand ranking in the CSAR 2013 benchmark.
    Fourches D; Politi R; Tropsha A
    J Chem Inf Model; 2015 Jan; 55(1):63-71. PubMed ID: 25521713
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 24. Boosted neural networks scoring functions for accurate ligand docking and ranking.
    Ashtawy HM; Mahapatra NR
    J Bioinform Comput Biol; 2018 Apr; 16(2):1850004. PubMed ID: 29495922
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 25. 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]  

  • 26. An Overview of Scoring Functions Used for Protein-Ligand Interactions in Molecular Docking.
    Li J; Fu A; Zhang L
    Interdiscip Sci; 2019 Jun; 11(2):320-328. PubMed ID: 30877639
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 27. GalaxyDock BP2 score: a hybrid scoring function for accurate protein-ligand docking.
    Baek M; Shin WH; Chung HW; Seok C
    J Comput Aided Mol Des; 2017 Jul; 31(7):653-666. PubMed ID: 28623486
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 28. LIBRA-WA: a web application for ligand binding site detection and protein function recognition.
    Toti D; Viet Hung L; Tortosa V; Brandi V; Polticelli F
    Bioinformatics; 2018 Mar; 34(5):878-880. PubMed ID: 29126218
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 29. Ligand-Enhanced Negative Images Optimized for Docking Rescoring.
    Kurkinen ST; Lehtonen JV; Pentikäinen OT; Postila PA
    Int J Mol Sci; 2022 Jul; 23(14):. PubMed ID: 35887220
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 30. Maximum common binding modes (MCBM): consensus docking scoring using multiple ligand information and interaction fingerprints.
    Renner S; Derksen S; Radestock S; Mörchen F
    J Chem Inf Model; 2008 Feb; 48(2):319-32. PubMed ID: 18211051
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 31. 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]  

  • 32. Generative Topographic Mapping of the Docking Conformational Space.
    Horvath D; Marcou G; Varnek A
    Molecules; 2019 Jun; 24(12):. PubMed ID: 31216756
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 33. AutoDockFR: Advances in Protein-Ligand Docking with Explicitly Specified Binding Site Flexibility.
    Ravindranath PA; Forli S; Goodsell DS; Olson AJ; Sanner MF
    PLoS Comput Biol; 2015 Dec; 11(12):e1004586. PubMed ID: 26629955
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 34. 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]  

  • 35. 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]  

  • 36. Boosting Protein-Ligand Binding Pose Prediction and Virtual Screening Based on Residue-Atom Distance Likelihood Potential and Graph Transformer.
    Shen C; Zhang X; Deng Y; Gao J; Wang D; Xu L; Pan P; Hou T; Kang Y
    J Med Chem; 2022 Aug; 65(15):10691-10706. PubMed ID: 35917397
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 37. Testing assumptions and hypotheses for rescoring success in protein-ligand docking.
    O'Boyle NM; Liebeschuetz JW; Cole JC
    J Chem Inf Model; 2009 Aug; 49(8):1871-8. PubMed ID: 19645429
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 38. Large scale free energy calculations for blind predictions of protein-ligand binding: the D3R Grand Challenge 2015.
    Deng N; Flynn WF; Xia J; Vijayan RS; Zhang B; He P; Mentes A; Gallicchio E; Levy RM
    J Comput Aided Mol Des; 2016 Sep; 30(9):743-751. PubMed ID: 27562018
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 39. Protein-specific scoring method for ligand discovery.
    Lu IL; Wang H
    J Comput Biol; 2012 Nov; 19(11):1215-26. PubMed ID: 23075003
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 40. A Consistent Scheme for Gradient-Based Optimization of Protein
    Flachsenberg F; Meyder A; Sommer K; Penner P; Rarey M
    J Chem Inf Model; 2020 Dec; 60(12):6502-6522. PubMed ID: 33258376
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Previous]   [Next]    [New Search]
    of 8.