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.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Journal Abstract Search

1163 related items for PubMed ID: 12910460

  • 1. Improved protein-ligand docking using GOLD.
    Verdonk ML, Cole JC, Hartshorn MJ, Murray CW, Taylor RD.
    Proteins; 2003 Sep 01; 52(4):609-23. PubMed ID: 12910460
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 2. Catalytic site prediction and virtual screening of cytochrome P450 2D6 substrates by consideration of water and rescoring in automated docking.
    de Graaf C, Oostenbrink C, Keizers PH, van der Wijst T, Jongejan A, Vermeulen NP.
    J Med Chem; 2006 Apr 20; 49(8):2417-30. PubMed ID: 16610785
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 3. Prediction of binding modes for ligands in the cytochromes P450 and other heme-containing proteins.
    Kirton SB, Murray CW, Verdonk ML, Taylor RD.
    Proteins; 2005 Mar 01; 58(4):836-44. PubMed ID: 15651036
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 4. A detailed comparison of current docking and scoring methods on systems of pharmaceutical relevance.
    Perola E, Walters WP, Charifson PS.
    Proteins; 2004 Aug 01; 56(2):235-49. PubMed ID: 15211508
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 5. An extensive test of 14 scoring functions using the PDBbind refined set of 800 protein-ligand complexes.
    Wang R, Lu Y, Fang X, Wang S.
    J Chem Inf Comput Sci; 2004 Aug 01; 44(6):2114-25. PubMed ID: 15554682
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 6. Comparative assessment of scoring functions on a diverse test set.
    Cheng T, Li X, Li Y, Liu Z, Wang R.
    J Chem Inf Model; 2009 Apr 01; 49(4):1079-93. PubMed ID: 19358517
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 7. General and targeted statistical potentials for protein-ligand interactions.
    Mooij WT, Verdonk ML.
    Proteins; 2005 Nov 01; 61(2):272-87. PubMed ID: 16106379
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 8. Assessing scoring functions for protein-ligand interactions.
    Ferrara P, Gohlke H, Price DJ, Klebe G, Brooks CL.
    J Med Chem; 2004 Jun 03; 47(12):3032-47. PubMed ID: 15163185
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 9. Supervised consensus scoring for docking and virtual screening.
    Teramoto R, Fukunishi H.
    J Chem Inf Model; 2007 Jun 03; 47(2):526-34. PubMed ID: 17295466
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 10. The consequences of scoring docked ligand conformations using free energy correlations.
    Spyrakis F, Amadasi A, Fornabaio M, Abraham DJ, Mozzarelli A, Kellogg GE, Cozzini P.
    Eur J Med Chem; 2007 Jul 03; 42(7):921-33. PubMed ID: 17346861
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 11. Prediction of multiple binding modes of the CDK2 inhibitors, anilinopyrazoles, using the automated docking programs GOLD, FlexX, and LigandFit: an evaluation of performance.
    Sato H, Shewchuk LM, Tang J.
    J Chem Inf Model; 2006 Jul 03; 46(6):2552-62. PubMed ID: 17125195
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 12. Protein-ligand docking against non-native protein conformers.
    Verdonk ML, Mortenson PN, Hall RJ, Hartshorn MJ, Murray CW.
    J Chem Inf Model; 2008 Nov 03; 48(11):2214-25. PubMed ID: 18954138
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 13. Comparative evaluation of 11 scoring functions for molecular docking.
    Wang R, Lu Y, Wang S.
    J Med Chem; 2003 Jun 05; 46(12):2287-303. PubMed ID: 12773034
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 14. Information theory-based scoring function for the structure-based prediction of protein-ligand binding affinity.
    Kulharia M, Goody RS, Jackson RM.
    J Chem Inf Model; 2008 Oct 05; 48(10):1990-8. PubMed ID: 18767831
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 15. Lead finder: an approach to improve accuracy of protein-ligand docking, binding energy estimation, and virtual screening.
    Stroganov OV, Novikov FN, Stroylov VS, Kulkov V, Chilov GG.
    J Chem Inf Model; 2008 Dec 05; 48(12):2371-85. PubMed ID: 19007114
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 16. PSI-DOCK: towards highly efficient and accurate flexible ligand docking.
    Pei J, Wang Q, Liu Z, Li Q, Yang K, Lai L.
    Proteins; 2006 Mar 01; 62(4):934-46. PubMed ID: 16395666
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 17. MolDock: a new technique for high-accuracy molecular docking.
    Thomsen R, Christensen MH.
    J Med Chem; 2006 Jun 01; 49(11):3315-21. PubMed ID: 16722650
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 18. Docking ligands into flexible and solvated macromolecules. 4. Are popular scoring functions accurate for this class of proteins?
    Englebienne P, Moitessier N.
    J Chem Inf Model; 2009 Jun 01; 49(6):1568-80. PubMed ID: 19445499
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 19. Evaluation of docking performance: comparative data on docking algorithms.
    Kontoyianni M, McClellan LM, Sokol GS.
    J Med Chem; 2004 Jan 29; 47(3):558-65. PubMed ID: 14736237
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 20.
    ; . PubMed ID:
    [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

    Page: [Next] [New Search]
    of 59.