Target‐Based Virtual Screening on Small‐Molecule Protein Binding Sites

[1]  Bohdan Waszkowycz,et al.  Towards improving compound selection in structure-based virtual screening. , 2008, Drug discovery today.

[2]  Paul Watson,et al.  Virtual Screening Using Protein-Ligand Docking: Avoiding Artificial Enrichment , 2004, J. Chem. Inf. Model..

[3]  J. Schwartz,et al.  Novel carbamates as potent histamine H3 receptor antagonists with high in vitro and oral in vivo activity. , 1996, Journal of medicinal chemistry.

[4]  Ismael Zamora,et al.  Virtual Screening and Scaffold Hopping Based on GRID Molecular Interaction Fields , 2005, J. Chem. Inf. Model..

[5]  P. Goodford.  A computational procedure for determining energetically favorable binding sites on biologically important macromolecules. , 1985, Journal of medicinal chemistry.

[6]  A. Hancock.  The challenge of drug discovery of a GPCR target: analysis of preclinical pharmacology of histamine H3 antagonists/inverse agonists. , 2006, Biochemical pharmacology.

[7]  Johanna Jyrkkärinne,et al.  Discovery of substituted sulfonamides and thiazolidin-4-one derivatives as agonists of human constitutive androstane receptor. , 2008, Biochemical pharmacology.

[8]  Thierry Langer,et al.  Comparative Analysis of Protein-Bound Ligand Conformations with Respect to Catalyst's Conformational Space Subsampling Algorithms , 2005, J. Chem. Inf. Model..

[9]  Jeremy R. H. Tame.  Scoring Functions – the First 100 Years , 2005, J. Comput. Aided Mol. Des..

[10]  P. Trojer,et al.  Virtual Screening and Biological Characterization of Novel Histone Arginine Methyltransferase PRMT1 Inhibitors , 2009, ChemMedChem.

[11]  Holger Gohlke,et al.  Elastic Potential Grids: Accurate and Efficient Representation of Intermolecular Interactions for Fully Flexible Docking , 2009, ChemMedChem.

[12]  Tudor I. Oprea,et al.  Optimization of CAMD techniques 3. Virtual screening enrichment studies: a help or hindrance in tool selection? , 2008, J. Comput. Aided Mol. Des..

[13]  Wolfgang Sippl,et al.  Medicinal chemical and pharmacological aspects of imidazole-containing histamine H3 receptor antagonists. , 2004, Mini reviews in medicinal chemistry.

[14]  M. Zacharias,et al.  Protein-ligand docking accounting for receptor side chain and global flexibility in normal modes: evaluation on kinase inhibitor cross docking. , 2008, Journal of medicinal chemistry.

[15]  G. Klebe.  Virtual ligand screening: strategies, perspectives and limitations , 2006, Drug Discovery Today.

[16]  John J. Irwin,et al.  Community benchmarks for virtual screening , 2008, J. Comput. Aided Mol. Des..

[17]  C. Allis,et al.  Translating the Histone Code , 2001, Science.

[18]  Xing Zhang,et al.  Structure of the predominant protein arginine methyltransferase PRMT1 and analysis of its binding to substrate peptides. , 2003, Structure.

[19]  Michael K. Gilson,et al.  Screening Drug-Like Compounds by Docking to Homology Models: A Systematic Study , 2006, J. Chem. Inf. Model..

[20]  David A Pearlman,et al.  Evaluating the molecular mechanics poisson-boltzmann surface area free energy method using a congeneric series of ligands to p38 MAP kinase. , 2005, Journal of medicinal chemistry.

[21]  G. Klebe,et al.  Successful virtual screening for a submicromolar antagonist of the neurokinin-1 receptor based on a ligand-supported homology model. , 2004, Journal of medicinal chemistry.

[22]  D. Goodsell,et al.  Automated docking to multiple target structures: Incorporation of protein mobility and structural water heterogeneity in AutoDock , 2002, Proteins.

[23]  A. Giannis,et al.  Epigenetics--an epicenter of gene regulation: histones and histone-modifying enzymes. , 2005, Angewandte Chemie.

[24]  M. Jung,et al.  Chromatin Modifications as Targets for New Anticancer Drugs , 2005, Archiv der Pharmazie.

[25]  Thierry Langer,et al.  LigandScout: 3-D Pharmacophores Derived from Protein-Bound Ligands and Their Use as Virtual Screening Filters , 2005, J. Chem. Inf. Model..

[26]  J. Bajorath,et al.  Docking and scoring in virtual screening for drug discovery: methods and applications , 2004, Nature Reviews Drug Discovery.

[27]  R. Abagyan,et al.  Flexible ligand docking to multiple receptor conformations: a practical alternative. , 2008, Current opinion in structural biology.

[28]  Adrian A Canutescu,et al.  SCWRL and MolIDE: computer programs for side-chain conformation prediction and homology modeling , 2008, Nature Protocols.

[29]  Holger Gohlke,et al.  Target flexibility: an emerging consideration in drug discovery and design. , 2008, Journal of medicinal chemistry.

[30]  William L Jorgensen,et al.  Efficient drug lead discovery and optimization. , 2009, Accounts of chemical research.

[31]  A. Nicholls,et al.  How to do an evaluation: pitfalls and traps , 2008, J. Comput. Aided Mol. Des..

[32]  E. Kellenberger,et al.  Identification of nonpeptide CCR5 receptor agonists by structure-based virtual screening. , 2007, Journal of medicinal chemistry.

[33]  John W. Liebeschuetz,et al.  Evaluating docking programs: keeping the playing field level , 2008, J. Comput. Aided Mol. Des..

[34]  Eric Verdin,et al.  Thiobarbiturates as Sirtuin Inhibitors: Virtual Screening, Free‐Energy Calculations, and Biological Testing , 2008, ChemMedChem.

[35]  René Meier,et al.  Generation of a homology model of the human histamine H3 receptor for ligand docking and pharmacophore-based screening , 2007, J. Comput. Aided Mol. Des..

[36]  A. Shilatifard,et al.  Covalent modifications of histones during development and disease pathogenesis , 2007, Nature Structural &Molecular Biology.

[37]  C R Ganellin,et al.  Distinct pharmacology of rat and human histamine H3 receptors: role of two amino acids in the third transmembrane domain , 2000, British journal of pharmacology.

[38]  G. Schneider,et al.  Virtual Screening for Selective Allosteric mGluR1 Antagonists and Structure–Activity Relationship Investigations for Coumarine Derivatives , 2007, ChemMedChem.

[39]  Andreas Evers,et al.  Virtual screening of biogenic amine-binding G-protein coupled receptors: comparative evaluation of protein- and ligand-based virtual screening protocols. , 2005, Journal of medicinal chemistry.

[40]  Wolfgang Guba,et al.  Integrating molecular design resources within modern drug discovery research: the Roche experience. , 2006, Drug discovery today.

[41]  Daniel L Baker,et al.  Virtual screening approaches for the identification of non-lipid autotaxin inhibitors. , 2008, Bioorganic & medicinal chemistry.

[42]  P. Hawkins,et al.  Comparison of shape-matching and docking as virtual screening tools. , 2007, Journal of medicinal chemistry.

[43]  Benoît Roux,et al.  Calculation of Standard Binding Free Energies:  Aromatic Molecules in the T4 Lysozyme L99A Mutant. , 2006, Journal of chemical theory and computation.

[44]  Jürgen Bajorath,et al.  New methodologies for ligand-based virtual screening. , 2005, Current pharmaceutical design.

[45]  Xiaodong Cheng,et al.  Crystal structure of the conserved core of protein arginine methyltransferase PRMT3 , 2000, The EMBO journal.

[46]  P. Trojer,et al.  Target-based approach to inhibitors of histone arginine methyltransferases. , 2007, Journal of medicinal chemistry.

[47]  G Wolber,et al.  Enhancing drug discovery through in silico screening: strategies to increase true positives retrieval rates. , 2008, Current medicinal chemistry.

[48]  M. Gilson,et al.  Free energy, entropy, and induced fit in host-guest recognition: calculations with the second-generation mining minima algorithm. , 2004, Journal of the American Chemical Society.

[49]  Yongbo Hu,et al.  Comparison of Several Molecular Docking Programs: Pose Prediction and Virtual Screening Accuracy , 2009, J. Chem. Inf. Model..

[50]  Brian K Shoichet,et al.  Prediction of protein-ligand interactions. Docking and scoring: successes and gaps. , 2006, Journal of medicinal chemistry.

[51]  J. Schwartz,et al.  Auto-inhibition of brain histamine release mediated by a novel class (H3) of histamine receptor , 1983, Nature.