203 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 9719584)
1. A scoring scheme for discriminating between drugs and nondrugs.
Sadowski J; Kubinyi H
J Med Chem; 1998 Aug; 41(18):3325-9. PubMed ID: 9719584
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Model-free drug-likeness from fragments.
Ursu O; Oprea TI
J Chem Inf Model; 2010 Aug; 50(8):1387-94. PubMed ID: 20726597
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Can we learn to distinguish between "drug-like" and "nondrug-like" molecules?
Ajay A; Walters WP; Murcko MA
J Med Chem; 1998 Aug; 41(18):3314-24. PubMed ID: 9719583
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Discriminating between drugs and nondrugs by prediction of activity spectra for substances (PASS).
Anzali S; Barnickel G; Cezanne B; Krug M; Filimonov D; Poroikov V
J Med Chem; 2001 Jul; 44(15):2432-7. PubMed ID: 11448225
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Descriptors, physical properties, and drug-likeness.
Brüstle M; Beck B; Schindler T; King W; Mitchell T; Clark T
J Med Chem; 2002 Aug; 45(16):3345-55. PubMed ID: 12139446
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. A large descriptor set and a probabilistic kernel-based classifier significantly improve druglikeness classification.
Li Q; Bender A; Pei J; Lai L
J Chem Inf Model; 2007; 47(5):1776-86. PubMed ID: 17718552
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Separating drugs from nondrugs: a statistical approach using atom pair distributions.
Hutter MC
J Chem Inf Model; 2007; 47(1):186-94. PubMed ID: 17238264
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Drugs and nondrugs: an effective discrimination with topological methods and artificial neural networks.
Murcia-Soler M; Pérez-Giménez F; García-March FJ; Salabert-Salvador MT; Díaz-Villanueva W; Castro-Bleda MJ
J Chem Inf Comput Sci; 2003; 43(5):1688-702. PubMed ID: 14502504
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. The properties of known drugs. 1. Molecular frameworks.
Bemis GW; Murcko MA
J Med Chem; 1996 Jul; 39(15):2887-93. PubMed ID: 8709122
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. A neural network based classification scheme for cytotoxicity predictions:Validation on 30,000 compounds.
Molnár L; Keseru GM; Papp A; Lorincz Z; Ambrus G; Darvas F
Bioorg Med Chem Lett; 2006 Feb; 16(4):1037-9. PubMed ID: 16288868
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. "In-house likeness": comparison of large compound collections using artificial neural networks.
Muresan S; Sadowski J
J Chem Inf Model; 2005; 45(4):888-93. PubMed ID: 16045282
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. A simple approach for indexing the oral druglikeness of a compound: discriminating druglike compounds from nondruglike ones.
Biswas D; Roy S; Sen S
J Chem Inf Model; 2006; 46(3):1394-401. PubMed ID: 16711759
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Design and evaluation of a molecular fingerprint involving the transformation of property descriptor values into a binary classification scheme.
Xue L; Godden JW; Stahura FL; Bajorath J
J Chem Inf Comput Sci; 2003; 43(4):1151-7. PubMed ID: 12870906
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Development of a virtual screening method for identification of "frequent hitters" in compound libraries.
Roche O; Schneider P; Zuegge J; Guba W; Kansy M; Alanine A; Bleicher K; Danel F; Gutknecht EM; Rogers-Evans M; Neidhart W; Stalder H; Dillon M; Sjögren E; Fotouhi N; Gillespie P; Goodnow R; Harris W; Jones P; Taniguchi M; Tsujii S; von der Saal W; Zimmermann G; Schneider G
J Med Chem; 2002 Jan; 45(1):137-42. PubMed ID: 11754585
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. FOG: Fragment Optimized Growth algorithm for the de novo generation of molecules occupying druglike chemical space.
Kutchukian PS; Lou D; Shakhnovich EI
J Chem Inf Model; 2009 Jul; 49(7):1630-42. PubMed ID: 19527020
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Modelling blood-brain barrier partitioning using Bayesian neural nets.
Winkler DA; Burden FR
J Mol Graph Model; 2004 Jul; 22(6):499-505. PubMed ID: 15182809
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Consensual classification of drug and nondrug compounds.
Pehlivanli AC; Ibrikci T; Ersoy OK
Int J Comput Biol Drug Des; 2008; 1(3):224-34. PubMed ID: 20054990
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Measuring CAMD technique performance. 2. How "druglike" are drugs? Implications of Random test set selection exemplified using druglikeness classification models.
Good AC; Hermsmeier MA
J Chem Inf Model; 2007; 47(1):110-4. PubMed ID: 17238255
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Core trees and consensus fragment sequences for molecular representation and similarity analysis.
Lounkine E; Bajorath J
J Chem Inf Model; 2008 Jun; 48(6):1161-6. PubMed ID: 18491888
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Analysis of pharmacology data and the prediction of adverse drug reactions and off-target effects from chemical structure.
Bender A; Scheiber J; Glick M; Davies JW; Azzaoui K; Hamon J; Urban L; Whitebread S; Jenkins JL
ChemMedChem; 2007 Jun; 2(6):861-73. PubMed ID: 17477341
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
