Published in J Comput Aided Mol Des on September 25, 2015
Rocker: Open source, easy-to-use tool for AUC and enrichment calculations and ROC visualization. J Cheminform (2016) 0.78
The Protein Data Bank. Nucleic Acids Res (2000) 187.10
The meaning and use of the area under a receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve. Radiology (1982) 79.76
Raster3D: photorealistic molecular graphics. Methods Enzymol (1997) 27.30
AutoDock Vina: improving the speed and accuracy of docking with a new scoring function, efficient optimization, and multithreading. J Comput Chem (2010) 25.20
Asparagine and glutamine: using hydrogen atom contacts in the choice of side-chain amide orientation. J Mol Biol (1999) 15.00
Calculating structures and free energies of complex molecules: combining molecular mechanics and continuum models. Acc Chem Res (2000) 10.78
The structural basis of estrogen receptor/coactivator recognition and the antagonism of this interaction by tamoxifen. Cell (1998) 9.96
Detection, delineation, measurement and display of cavities in macromolecular structures. Acta Crystallogr D Biol Crystallogr (1994) 7.53
A fast flexible docking method using an incremental construction algorithm. J Mol Biol (1996) 7.33
A critical assessment of docking programs and scoring functions. J Med Chem (2006) 5.78
Benchmarking sets for molecular docking. J Med Chem (2006) 5.57
Structural basis for selective inhibition of cyclooxygenase-2 by anti-inflammatory agents. Nature (1997) 5.11
Theory and applications of the generalized Born solvation model in macromolecular simulations. Biopolymers (2001) 4.68
Electrostatic aspects of protein-protein interactions. Curr Opin Struct Biol (2000) 4.57
Crystal structure of the glucocorticoid receptor ligand binding domain reveals a novel mode of receptor dimerization and coactivator recognition. Cell (2002) 3.13
Comparison of shape-matching and docking as virtual screening tools. J Med Chem (2007) 3.09
Asymmetry in the PPARgamma/RXRalpha crystal structure reveals the molecular basis of heterodimerization among nuclear receptors. Mol Cell (2000) 3.01
Protein and ligand preparation: parameters, protocols, and influence on virtual screening enrichments. J Comput Aided Mol Des (2013) 2.93
Directory of useful decoys, enhanced (DUD-E): better ligands and decoys for better benchmarking. J Med Chem (2012) 2.86
Assessing scoring functions for protein-ligand interactions. J Med Chem (2004) 2.41
Structural basis for androgen receptor interdomain and coactivator interactions suggests a transition in nuclear receptor activation function dominance. Mol Cell (2004) 2.38
Comparative evaluation of eight docking tools for docking and virtual screening accuracy. Proteins (2004) 2.12
Ensemble docking of multiple protein structures: considering protein structural variations in molecular docking. Proteins (2007) 2.03
Molecular shape and medicinal chemistry: a perspective. J Med Chem (2010) 1.91
Comparison of topological, shape, and docking methods in virtual screening. J Chem Inf Model (2007) 1.89
Structural basis for the activity of drugs that inhibit phosphodiesterases. Structure (2004) 1.84
FRED pose prediction and virtual screening accuracy. J Chem Inf Model (2011) 1.84
Structural characterization of a subtype-selective ligand reveals a novel mode of estrogen receptor antagonism. Nat Struct Biol (2002) 1.83
Comparison of several molecular docking programs: pose prediction and virtual screening accuracy. J Chem Inf Model (2009) 1.77
BODIL: a molecular modeling environment for structure-function analysis and drug design. J Comput Aided Mol Des (2004) 1.64
Structure of the catalytic domain of human phosphodiesterase 5 with bound drug molecules. Nature (2003) 1.51
Unveiling the full potential of flexible receptor docking using multiple crystallographic structures. J Med Chem (2005) 1.50
Community benchmarks for virtual screening. J Comput Aided Mol Des (2008) 1.49
Molecular recognition of agonist ligands by RXRs. Mol Endocrinol (2002) 1.47
eHiTS: a new fast, exhaustive flexible ligand docking system. J Mol Graph Model (2006) 1.44
A ligand-mediated hydrogen bond network required for the activation of the mineralocorticoid receptor. J Biol Chem (2005) 1.41
ConfGen: a conformational search method for efficient generation of bioactive conformers. J Chem Inf Model (2010) 1.37
ShaEP: molecular overlay based on shape and electrostatic potential. J Chem Inf Model (2009) 1.31
Computational methods for biomolecular electrostatics. Methods Cell Biol (2008) 1.27
Recognizing pitfalls in virtual screening: a critical review. J Chem Inf Model (2012) 1.27
Coupling of receptor conformation and ligand orientation determine graded activity. Nat Chem Biol (2010) 1.25
How to optimize shape-based virtual screening: choosing the right query and including chemical information. J Chem Inf Model (2009) 1.19
Doubling the size of the glucocorticoid receptor ligand binding pocket by deacylcortivazol. Mol Cell Biol (2007) 1.18
The importance of discerning shape in molecular pharmacology. Trends Pharmacol Sci (2009) 1.17
Progesterone receptor ligand binding pocket flexibility: crystal structures of the norethindrone and mometasone furoate complexes. J Med Chem (2004) 1.16
Comparison of crystal structures of human androgen receptor ligand-binding domain complexed with various agonists reveals molecular determinants responsible for binding affinity. Protein Sci (2006) 1.15
The novel benzopyran class of selective cyclooxygenase-2 inhibitors. Part 2: the second clinical candidate having a shorter and favorable human half-life. Bioorg Med Chem Lett (2010) 1.13
Comprehensive comparison of ligand-based virtual screening tools against the DUD data set reveals limitations of current 3D methods. J Chem Inf Model (2010) 1.13
Effects of protein conformation in docking: improved pose prediction through protein pocket adaptation. J Comput Aided Mol Des (2009) 1.11
Comparison of ligand- and structure-based virtual screening on the DUD data set. J Chem Inf Model (2009) 1.08
Substantial improvements in large-scale redocking and screening using the novel HYDE scoring function. J Comput Aided Mol Des (2011) 1.04
Potential energy functions. Curr Opin Struct Biol (1995) 1.02
Ligand pose and orientational sampling in molecular docking. PLoS One (2013) 0.99
Discovery of novel PPAR ligands by a virtual screening approach based on pharmacophore modeling, 3D shape, and electrostatic similarity screening. J Med Chem (2008) 0.95
Docking ligands into flexible and solvated macromolecules. 3. Impact of input ligand conformation, protein flexibility, and water molecules on the accuracy of docking programs. J Chem Inf Model (2009) 0.89
Virtual decoy sets for molecular docking benchmarks. J Chem Inf Model (2011) 0.88
Estrogen receptor ligands. II. Discovery of benzoxathiins as potent, selective estrogen receptor alpha modulators. J Med Chem (2004) 0.87
MolShaCS: a free and open source tool for ligand similarity identification based on Gaussian descriptors. Eur J Med Chem (2012) 0.87
Pharmacophore-based virtual screening versus docking-based virtual screening: a benchmark comparison against eight targets. Acta Pharmacol Sin (2009) 0.86
Toward fully automated high performance computing drug discovery: a massively parallel virtual screening pipeline for docking and molecular mechanics/generalized Born surface area rescoring to improve enrichment. J Chem Inf Model (2014) 0.84
Structure-based design of indole propionic acids as novel PPARalpha/gamma co-agonists. Bioorg Med Chem Lett (2006) 0.84
The role of protonation states in ligand-receptor recognition and binding. Curr Pharm Des (2013) 0.83
The valence state combination model: a generic framework for handling tautomers and protonation states. J Chem Inf Model (2014) 0.77
Improving the developability profile of pyrrolidine progesterone receptor partial agonists. Bioorg Med Chem Lett (2009) 0.77
Improvement of virtual screening results by docking data feature analysis. J Chem Inf Model (2014) 0.75
Efficient virtual screening using multiple protein conformations described as negative images of the ligand-binding site. J Chem Inf Model (2010) 0.75
Comparison of virtual high-throughput screening methods for the identification of phosphodiesterase-5 inhibitors. J Chem Inf Model (2011) 0.75