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 *

282 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 35142086)

  • 41. Machine learning approaches and their applications in drug discovery and design.
    Priya S; Tripathi G; Singh DB; Jain P; Kumar A
    Chem Biol Drug Des; 2022 Jul; 100(1):136-153. PubMed ID: 35426249
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 42. Docking pose selection by interaction pattern graph similarity: application to the D3R grand challenge 2015.
    Slynko I; Da Silva F; Bret G; Rognan D
    J Comput Aided Mol Des; 2016 Sep; 30(9):669-683. PubMed ID: 27480696
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 43. Deep Scoring Neural Network Replacing the Scoring Function Components to Improve the Performance of Structure-Based Molecular Docking.
    Yang L; Yang G; Chen X; Yang Q; Yao X; Bing Z; Niu Y; Huang L; Yang L
    ACS Chem Neurosci; 2021 Jun; 12(12):2133-2142. PubMed ID: 34081851
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 44. Protein-Ligand Docking in the Machine-Learning Era.
    Yang C; Chen EA; Zhang Y
    Molecules; 2022 Jul; 27(14):. PubMed ID: 35889440
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 45. A D3R prospective evaluation of machine learning for protein-ligand scoring.
    Sunseri J; Ragoza M; Collins J; Koes DR
    J Comput Aided Mol Des; 2016 Sep; 30(9):761-771. PubMed ID: 27592011
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 46. PharmRF: A machine-learning scoring function to identify the best protein-ligand complexes for structure-based pharmacophore screening with high enrichments.
    Kumar SP; Dixit NY; Patel CN; Rawal RM; Pandya HA
    J Comput Chem; 2022 May; 43(12):847-863. PubMed ID: 35301752
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 47. Protein-Ligand Scoring with Convolutional Neural Networks.
    Ragoza M; Hochuli J; Idrobo E; Sunseri J; Koes DR
    J Chem Inf Model; 2017 Apr; 57(4):942-957. PubMed ID: 28368587
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 48. AGL-Score: Algebraic Graph Learning Score for Protein-Ligand Binding Scoring, Ranking, Docking, and Screening.
    Nguyen DD; Wei GW
    J Chem Inf Model; 2019 Jul; 59(7):3291-3304. PubMed ID: 31257871
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 49. Leveraging scaffold information to predict protein-ligand binding affinity with an empirical graph neural network.
    Xia C; Feng SH; Xia Y; Pan X; Shen HB
    Brief Bioinform; 2023 Jan; 24(1):. PubMed ID: 36627113
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 50. Computational Prediction of Binding Affinity for CDK2-ligand Complexes. A Protein Target for Cancer Drug Discovery.
    Veit-Acosta M; de Azevedo Junior WF
    Curr Med Chem; 2022; 29(14):2438-2455. PubMed ID: 34365938
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 51. Discovery of Functional Motifs from the Interface Region of Oligomeric Proteins Using Frequent Subgraph Mining.
    Saha TK; Katebi A; Dhifli W; Al Hasan M
    IEEE/ACM Trans Comput Biol Bioinform; 2019; 16(5):1537-1549. PubMed ID: 28961123
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 52. Improving docking results via reranking of ensembles of ligand poses in multiple X-ray protein conformations with MM-GBSA.
    Greenidge PA; Kramer C; Mozziconacci JC; Sherman W
    J Chem Inf Model; 2014 Oct; 54(10):2697-717. PubMed ID: 25266271
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 53. Development and evaluation of a deep learning model for protein-ligand binding affinity prediction.
    Stepniewska-Dziubinska MM; Zielenkiewicz P; Siedlecki P
    Bioinformatics; 2018 Nov; 34(21):3666-3674. PubMed ID: 29757353
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 54. Tapping on the Black Box: How Is the Scoring Power of a Machine-Learning Scoring Function Dependent on the Training Set?
    Su M; Feng G; Liu Z; Li Y; Wang R
    J Chem Inf Model; 2020 Mar; 60(3):1122-1136. PubMed ID: 32085675
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 55. Binding mode information improves fragment docking.
    Jacquemard C; Drwal MN; Desaphy J; Kellenberger E
    J Cheminform; 2019 Mar; 11(1):24. PubMed ID: 30903304
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 56. Statistical potential for modeling and ranking of protein-ligand interactions.
    Fan H; Schneidman-Duhovny D; Irwin JJ; Dong G; Shoichet BK; Sali A
    J Chem Inf Model; 2011 Dec; 51(12):3078-92. PubMed ID: 22014038
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 57. 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]  

  • 58. Optimizing interactions to protein binding sites by integrating docking-scoring strategies into generative AI methods.
    Sauer S; Matter H; Hessler G; Grebner C
    Front Chem; 2022; 10():1012507. PubMed ID: 36339033
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 59. Forging the Basis for Developing Protein-Ligand Interaction Scoring Functions.
    Liu Z; Su M; Han L; Liu J; Yang Q; Li Y; Wang R
    Acc Chem Res; 2017 Feb; 50(2):302-309. PubMed ID: 28182403
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 60. Intelligently Applying Artificial Intelligence in Chemoinformatics.
    Sharma S; Sharma D
    Curr Top Med Chem; 2018; 18(20):1804-1826. PubMed ID: 30465503
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Previous]   [Next]    [New Search]
    of 15.