A comparative study of quantitative structure–activity relationship methods based on gallic acid derivatives
暂无分享,去创建一个
[1] H. Park Choo,et al. A comparative study of quantitative structure activity relationship methods based on antitumor diarylsulfonylureas. , 2001, European journal of medicinal chemistry.
[2] Comparative molecular field analysis as a tool to evaluate mode of action of chemical hybridization agents. , 1999, Journal of agricultural and food chemistry.
[3] Richard E. Speece,et al. Determining chemical toxicity to aquatic species , 1990 .
[4] Clayton Springer,et al. CoMFA and HQSAR of acylhydrazide cruzain inhibitors. , 2002, Bioorganic & medicinal chemistry letters.
[5] R. Webster Homer,et al. SYBYL Line Notation (SLN): A Versatile Language for Chemical Structure Representation , 1997, J. Chem. Inf. Comput. Sci..
[6] Yu Chen,et al. Evaluation of Quantitative Structure-Activity Relationship Methods for Large-Scale Prediction of Chemicals Binding to the Estrogen Receptor , 1998, J. Chem. Inf. Comput. Sci..
[7] Kimito Funatsu,et al. Rational choice of bioactive conformations through use of conformation analysis and 3-way partial least squares modeling , 2000 .
[8] R. Ji,et al. A 3D-QSAR study on ginkgolides and their analogues with comparative molecular field analysis. , 1998, Bioorganic & medicinal chemistry letters.
[9] Weida Tong,et al. QSAR Models Using a Large Diverse Set of Estrogens , 2001, J. Chem. Inf. Comput. Sci..
[10] A. Zhang,et al. Studies of 3D-quantitative structure-activity relationships on a set of nitroaromatic compounds: CoMFA, advanced CoMFA and CoMSIA. , 2002, Chemosphere.
[11] G R Marshall,et al. 3D-QSAR: a current perspective. , 1995, Trends in pharmacological sciences.
[12] L. Wang,et al. Predicting toxicity of benzene derivatives by molecular hologram derived quantitative structure–activity relationships (QSARS) , 2003, SAR and QSAR in environmental research.
[13] A. Debnath,et al. Three-dimensional quantitative structure-activity relationship study on cyclic urea derivatives as HIV-1 protease inhibitors: application of comparative molecular field analysis. , 1999, Journal of medicinal chemistry.
[14] M. Jung,et al. CoMFA of artemisinin derivatives: effect of location and size of lattice. , 2001, Bioorganic & medicinal chemistry letters.
[15] S. Rault,et al. Comparative Molecular Field Analysis of Chlorophenols. application in Ecotoxicology , 1994 .
[16] H. Kubinyi. Comparative Molecular Field Analysis (CoMFA) , 2002 .
[17] J. McFarland,et al. Comparative molecular field analysis of anticoccidial triazines. , 1992, Journal of medicinal chemistry.
[18] S. Rault,et al. Applicability of CoMFA in ecotoxicology: a critical study on chlorophenols. , 1995, Ecotoxicology and environmental safety.
[19] R. Cramer,et al. Comparative molecular field analysis (CoMFA). 1. Effect of shape on binding of steroids to carrier proteins. , 1988, Journal of the American Chemical Society.
[20] A. Debnath,et al. Mechanistic interpretation of the genotoxicity of nitrofurans (antibacterial agents) using quantitative structure-activity relationships and comparative molecular field analysis. , 1993, Journal of medicinal chemistry.
[21] R. Ji,et al. Computer-aided design, synthesis and biological assay of p-methylsulfonamido phenylethylamine analogues. , 2000, Bioorganic & medicinal chemistry letters.
[22] Atul Agarwal,et al. 3‐D QSAR for intrinsic activity of 5‐HT1A receptor ligands by the method of comparative molecular field analysis , 1993, J. Comput. Chem..
[23] R. Yunes,et al. Structure-activity relationships for the analgesic activity of gallic acid derivatives. , 2000, Farmaco.