508 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 32737667)
1. Benchmarking GPCR homology model template selection in combination with de novo loop generation.
Szwabowski GL; Castleman PN; Sears CK; Wink LH; Cole JA; Baker DL; Parrill AL
J Comput Aided Mol Des; 2020 Oct; 34(10):1027-1044. PubMed ID: 32737667
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. GPCR homology model template selection benchmarking: Global versus local similarity measures.
Castleman PN; Sears CK; Cole JA; Baker DL; Parrill AL
J Mol Graph Model; 2019 Jan; 86():235-246. PubMed ID: 30390544
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Assessing GPCR homology models constructed from templates of various transmembrane sequence identities: Binding mode prediction and docking enrichment.
Loo JSE; Emtage AL; Ng KW; Yong ASJ; Doughty SW
J Mol Graph Model; 2018 Mar; 80():38-47. PubMed ID: 29306746
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Efficiency of Homology Modeling Assisted Molecular Docking in G-protein Coupled Receptors.
Bhunia SS; Saxena AK
Curr Top Med Chem; 2021; 21(4):269-294. PubMed ID: 32901584
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Reliability of Docking-Based Virtual Screening for GPCR Ligands with Homology Modeled Structures: A Case Study of the Angiotensin II Type I Receptor.
Chen H; Fu W; Wang Z; Wang X; Lei T; Zhu F; Li D; Chang S; Xu L; Hou T
ACS Chem Neurosci; 2019 Jan; 10(1):677-689. PubMed ID: 30265513
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. A benchmark study of loop modeling methods applied to G protein-coupled receptors.
Wink LH; Baker DL; Cole JA; Parrill AL
J Comput Aided Mol Des; 2019 Jun; 33(6):573-595. PubMed ID: 31123958
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. GPCR Homology Model Generation for Lead Optimization.
Tautermann CS
Methods Mol Biol; 2018; 1705():115-131. PubMed ID: 29188560
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Assessment and challenges of ligand docking into comparative models of G-protein coupled receptors.
Nguyen ED; Norn C; Frimurer TM; Meiler J
PLoS One; 2013; 8(7):e67302. PubMed ID: 23844000
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Self-docking and cross-docking simulations of G protein-coupled receptor-ligand complexes: Impact of ligand type and receptor activation state.
Thomas BN; Parrill AL; Baker DL
J Mol Graph Model; 2022 May; 112():108119. PubMed ID: 34979368
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Template selection and refinement considerations for modelling aminergic GPCR-ligand complexes.
Urmi KF; Finch AM; Griffith R
J Mol Graph Model; 2017 Sep; 76():488-503. PubMed ID: 28818718
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Combining fragment docking with graph theory to improve ligand docking for homology model structures.
Sarfaraz S; Muneer I; Liu H
J Comput Aided Mol Des; 2020 Dec; 34(12):1237-1259. PubMed ID: 33034007
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Towards predictive docking at aminergic G-protein coupled receptors.
Jakubík J; El-Fakahany EE; Doležal V
J Mol Model; 2015 Nov; 21(11):284. PubMed ID: 26453085
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Homology modeling of G-protein-coupled receptors with X-ray structures on the rise.
Yarnitzky T; Levit A; Niv MY
Curr Opin Drug Discov Devel; 2010 May; 13(3):317-25. PubMed ID: 20443165
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Ligand-steered modeling and docking: A benchmarking study in class A G-protein-coupled receptors.
Phatak SS; Gatica EA; Cavasotto CN
J Chem Inf Model; 2010 Dec; 50(12):2119-28. PubMed ID: 21080692
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Current assessment of docking into GPCR crystal structures and homology models: successes, challenges, and guidelines.
Beuming T; Sherman W
J Chem Inf Model; 2012 Dec; 52(12):3263-77. PubMed ID: 23121495
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Homology Modeling of Class A G-Protein-Coupled Receptors in the Age of the Structure Boom.
Tiss A; Ben Boubaker R; Henrion D; Guissouma H; Chabbert M
Methods Mol Biol; 2021; 2315():73-97. PubMed ID: 34302671
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Comparative modeling and docking of chemokine-receptor interactions with Rosetta.
Wedemeyer MJ; Mueller BK; Bender BJ; Meiler J; Volkman BF
Biochem Biophys Res Commun; 2020 Jul; 528(2):389-397. PubMed ID: 31924303
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Performance of virtual screening against GPCR homology models: Impact of template selection and treatment of binding site plasticity.
Jaiteh M; Rodríguez-Espigares I; Selent J; Carlsson J
PLoS Comput Biol; 2020 Mar; 16(3):e1007680. PubMed ID: 32168319
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. From heptahelical bundle to hits from the Haystack: structure-based virtual screening for GPCR ligands.
Kooistra AJ; Roumen L; Leurs R; de Esch IJ; de Graaf C
Methods Enzymol; 2013; 522():279-336. PubMed ID: 23374191
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Galaxy7TM: flexible GPCR-ligand docking by structure refinement.
Lee GR; Seok C
Nucleic Acids Res; 2016 Jul; 44(W1):W502-6. PubMed ID: 27131365
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
