265 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 33337877)
1. Ligand-Binding-Site Refinement to Generate Reliable Holo Protein Structure Conformations from Apo Structures.
Guterres H; Park SJ; Jiang W; Im W
J Chem Inf Model; 2021 Jan; 61(1):535-546. PubMed ID: 33337877
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Holo Protein Conformation Generation from Apo Structures by Ligand Binding Site Refinement.
Zhang J; Li H; Zhao X; Wu Q; Huang SY
J Chem Inf Model; 2022 Nov; 62(22):5806-5820. PubMed ID: 36342197
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Information decay in molecular docking screens against holo, apo, and modeled conformations of enzymes.
McGovern SL; Shoichet BK
J Med Chem; 2003 Jul; 46(14):2895-907. PubMed ID: 12825931
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Benchmarking Refined and Unrefined AlphaFold2 Structures for Hit Discovery.
Zhang Y; Vass M; Shi D; Abualrous E; Chambers JM; Chopra N; Higgs C; Kasavajhala K; Li H; Nandekar P; Sato H; Miller EB; Repasky MP; Jerome SV
J Chem Inf Model; 2023 Mar; 63(6):1656-1667. PubMed ID: 36897766
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Ligand-Binding-Site Structure Refinement Using Molecular Dynamics with Restraints Derived from Predicted Binding Site Templates.
Guterres H; Lee HS; Im W
J Chem Theory Comput; 2019 Nov; 15(11):6524-6535. PubMed ID: 31557013
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Inherent versus induced protein flexibility: Comparisons within and between apo and holo structures.
Clark JJ; Benson ML; Smith RD; Carlson HA
PLoS Comput Biol; 2019 Jan; 15(1):e1006705. PubMed ID: 30699115
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Improving Protein-Ligand Docking Results with High-Throughput Molecular Dynamics Simulations.
Guterres H; Im W
J Chem Inf Model; 2020 Apr; 60(4):2189-2198. PubMed ID: 32227880
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Protein structure prediction provides comparable performance to crystallographic structures in docking-based virtual screening.
Du H; Brender JR; Zhang J; Zhang Y
Methods; 2015 Jan; 71():77-84. PubMed ID: 25220914
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Holo-like and Druggable Protein Conformations from Enhanced Sampling of Binding Pocket Volume and Shape.
Basciu A; Malloci G; Pietrucci F; Bonvin AMJJ; Vargiu AV
J Chem Inf Model; 2019 Apr; 59(4):1515-1528. PubMed ID: 30883122
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. CDOCKER and λ-dynamics for prospective prediction in D₃R Grand Challenge 2.
Ding X; Hayes RL; Vilseck JZ; Charles MK; Brooks CL
J Comput Aided Mol Des; 2018 Jan; 32(1):89-102. PubMed ID: 28884249
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. PoLi: A Virtual Screening Pipeline Based on Template Pocket and Ligand Similarity.
Roy A; Srinivasan B; Skolnick J
J Chem Inf Model; 2015 Aug; 55(8):1757-70. PubMed ID: 26225536
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. The impact of molecular dynamics sampling on the performance of virtual screening against GPCRs.
Tarcsay A; Paragi G; Vass M; Jójárt B; Bogár F; Keserű GM
J Chem Inf Model; 2013 Nov; 53(11):2990-9. PubMed ID: 24116387
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Protein flexibility in ligand docking and virtual screening to protein kinases.
Cavasotto CN; Abagyan RA
J Mol Biol; 2004 Mar; 337(1):209-25. PubMed ID: 15001363
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. A Cross-Docking Study on Matrix Metalloproteinase Family.
Ramezani M; Shamsara J
Antiinflamm Antiallergy Agents Med Chem; 2015; 14(3):164-71. PubMed ID: 26872606
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Ligity: A Non-Superpositional, Knowledge-Based Approach to Virtual Screening.
Ebejer JP; Finn PW; Wong WK; Deane CM; Morris GM
J Chem Inf Model; 2019 Jun; 59(6):2600-2616. PubMed ID: 31117509
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Conformational transitions upon ligand binding: holo-structure prediction from apo conformations.
Seeliger D; de Groot BL
PLoS Comput Biol; 2010 Jan; 6(1):e1000634. PubMed ID: 20066034
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Virtual Screening of Human Class-A GPCRs Using Ligand Profiles Built on Multiple Ligand-Receptor Interactions.
Chan WKB; Zhang Y
J Mol Biol; 2020 Aug; 432(17):4872-4890. PubMed ID: 32652079
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Hidden bias in the DUD-E dataset leads to misleading performance of deep learning in structure-based virtual screening.
Chen L; Cruz A; Ramsey S; Dickson CJ; Duca JS; Hornak V; Koes DR; Kurtzman T
PLoS One; 2019; 14(8):e0220113. PubMed ID: 31430292
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. FINDSITE
Zhou H; Cao H; Skolnick J
J Chem Inf Model; 2018 Nov; 58(11):2343-2354. PubMed ID: 30278128
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. CHARMM-GUI-Based Induced Fit Docking Workflow to Generate Reliable Protein-Ligand Binding Modes.
Guterres H; Im W
J Chem Inf Model; 2023 Aug; 63(15):4772-4779. PubMed ID: 37462607
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
