197 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 35049312)
1. Reliable
Crean RM; Pudney CR; Cole DK; van der Kamp MW
J Chem Inf Model; 2022 Feb; 62(3):577-590. PubMed ID: 35049312
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Assessing the performance of the MM/PBSA and MM/GBSA methods. 1. The accuracy of binding free energy calculations based on molecular dynamics simulations.
Hou T; Wang J; Li Y; Wang W
J Chem Inf Model; 2011 Jan; 51(1):69-82. PubMed ID: 21117705
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Assessing the performance of the MM/PBSA and MM/GBSA methods. 6. Capability to predict protein-protein binding free energies and re-rank binding poses generated by protein-protein docking.
Chen F; Liu H; Sun H; Pan P; Li Y; Li D; Hou T
Phys Chem Chem Phys; 2016 Aug; 18(32):22129-39. PubMed ID: 27444142
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Comparison of radii sets, entropy, QM methods, and sampling on MM-PBSA, MM-GBSA, and QM/MM-GBSA ligand binding energies of F. tularensis enoyl-ACP reductase (FabI).
Su PC; Tsai CC; Mehboob S; Hevener KE; Johnson ME
J Comput Chem; 2015 Sep; 36(25):1859-73. PubMed ID: 26216222
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Assessing the performance of the molecular mechanics/Poisson Boltzmann surface area and molecular mechanics/generalized Born surface area methods. II. The accuracy of ranking poses generated from docking.
Hou T; Wang J; Li Y; Wang W
J Comput Chem; 2011 Apr; 32(5):866-77. PubMed ID: 20949517
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. The MM/PBSA and MM/GBSA methods to estimate ligand-binding affinities.
Genheden S; Ryde U
Expert Opin Drug Discov; 2015 May; 10(5):449-61. PubMed ID: 25835573
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. How Well Does the Extended Linear Interaction Energy Method Perform in Accurate Binding Free Energy Calculations?
Hao D; He X; Ji B; Zhang S; Wang J
J Chem Inf Model; 2020 Dec; 60(12):6624-6633. PubMed ID: 33213150
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Develop and test a solvent accessible surface area-based model in conformational entropy calculations.
Wang J; Hou T
J Chem Inf Model; 2012 May; 52(5):1199-212. PubMed ID: 22497310
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Development and Evaluation of MM/GBSA Based on a Variable Dielectric GB Model for Predicting Protein-Ligand Binding Affinities.
Wang E; Liu H; Wang J; Weng G; Sun H; Wang Z; Kang Y; Hou T
J Chem Inf Model; 2020 Nov; 60(11):5353-5365. PubMed ID: 32175734
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Assessing the performance of MM/PBSA and MM/GBSA methods. 3. The impact of force fields and ligand charge models.
Xu L; Sun H; Li Y; Wang J; Hou T
J Phys Chem B; 2013 Jul; 117(28):8408-21. PubMed ID: 23789789
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Uni-GBSA: an open-source and web-based automatic workflow to perform MM/GB(PB)SA calculations for virtual screening.
Yang M; Bo Z; Xu T; Xu B; Wang D; Zheng H
Brief Bioinform; 2023 Jul; 24(4):. PubMed ID: 37328705
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Assessing the performance of MM/PBSA and MM/GBSA methods. 9. Prediction reliability of binding affinities and binding poses for protein-peptide complexes.
Weng G; Wang E; Chen F; Sun H; Wang Z; Hou T
Phys Chem Chem Phys; 2019 May; 21(19):10135-10145. PubMed ID: 31062799
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Assessing the performance of MM/PBSA and MM/GBSA methods. 4. Accuracies of MM/PBSA and MM/GBSA methodologies evaluated by various simulation protocols using PDBbind data set.
Sun H; Li Y; Tian S; Xu L; Hou T
Phys Chem Chem Phys; 2014 Aug; 16(31):16719-29. PubMed ID: 24999761
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Molecular dynamics investigation on a series of HIV protease inhibitors: assessing the performance of MM-PBSA and MM-GBSA approaches.
Srivastava HK; Sastry GN
J Chem Inf Model; 2012 Nov; 52(11):3088-98. PubMed ID: 23121465
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Assessing the Performance of MM/PBSA, MM/GBSA, and QM-MM/GBSA Approaches on Protein/Carbohydrate Complexes: Effect of Implicit Solvent Models, QM Methods, and Entropic Contributions.
Mishra SK; Koča J
J Phys Chem B; 2018 Aug; 122(34):8113-8121. PubMed ID: 30084252
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Interaction Entropy for Computational Alanine Scanning.
Yan Y; Yang M; Ji CG; Zhang JZH
J Chem Inf Model; 2017 May; 57(5):1112-1122. PubMed ID: 28406301
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Identification of potent L,D-transpeptidase 5 inhibitors for Mycobacterium tuberculosis as potential anti-TB leads: virtual screening and molecular dynamics simulations.
Sabe VT; Tolufashe GF; Ibeji CU; Maseko SB; Govender T; Maguire GEM; Lamichhane G; Honarparvar B; Kruger HG
J Mol Model; 2019 Oct; 25(11):328. PubMed ID: 31656981
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Characterizing the stabilization effects of stabilizers in protein-protein systems with end-point binding free energy calculations.
Tang R; Chen P; Wang Z; Wang L; Hao H; Hou T; Sun H
Brief Bioinform; 2022 May; 23(3):. PubMed ID: 35395683
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. An efficient computational method for calculating ligand binding affinities.
Suenaga A; Okimoto N; Hirano Y; Fukui K
PLoS One; 2012; 7(8):e42846. PubMed ID: 22916168
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Assessment of Different Parameters on the Accuracy of Computational Alanine Scanning of Protein-Protein Complexes with the Molecular Mechanics/Generalized Born Surface Area Method.
Valdés-Tresanco ME; Valdés-Tresanco MS; Moreno E; Valiente PA
J Phys Chem B; 2023 Feb; 127(4):944-954. PubMed ID: 36661180
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
