Literature DB >> 17477520

3D QSAR methods: Phase and Catalyst compared.

David A Evans1, Thompson N Doman, David A Thorner, Michael J Bodkin.   

Abstract

The programs Phase and Catalyst HypoGen are compared for their performance in determining three-dimensional quantitative structure-activity relationships. Eight sets of compounds with measured activity were collected from the public literature and partitioned into suitable training and test sets by an automated procedure. A range of models is built with each program, and suggested parameter variations are investigated. The models are assessed by their ability to predict the activity of compounds in the test set, and it is demonstrated that the performance of Phase is better than or equal to that of Catalyst HypoGen, with the data sets and parameters used here. Additionally, compounds in two of the data sets are overlaid on crystallographic structures of similar ligands in complex with the target receptor, in order to guide pharmacophore generation by the two programs, but the resulting models do not perform better.

Year:  2007        PMID: 17477520     DOI: 10.1021/ci7000082

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Chem Inf Model        ISSN: 1549-9596            Impact factor:   4.956


  14 in total

1.  Predicting the potency of hERG K⁺ channel inhibition by combining 3D-QSAR pharmacophore and 2D-QSAR models.

Authors:  Yayu Tan; Yadong Chen; Qidong You; Haopeng Sun; Manhua Li
Journal:  J Mol Model       Date:  2011-06-10       Impact factor: 1.810

2.  Pharmacophore-based screening and drug repurposing exemplified on glycogen synthase kinase-3 inhibitors.

Authors:  Luminita Crisan; Sorin Avram; Liliana Pacureanu
Journal:  Mol Divers       Date:  2017-01-21       Impact factor: 2.943

Review 3.  Molecular characterization of CYP2B6 substrates.

Authors:  Sean Ekins; Manisha Iyer; Matthew D Krasowski; Evan D Kharasch
Journal:  Curr Drug Metab       Date:  2008-06       Impact factor: 3.731

Review 4.  How to do an evaluation: pitfalls and traps.

Authors:  Paul C D Hawkins; Gregory L Warren; A Geoffrey Skillman; Anthony Nicholls
Journal:  J Comput Aided Mol Des       Date:  2008-01-23       Impact factor: 3.686

5.  Atom-based 3D-QSAR, molecular docking and molecular dynamics simulation assessment of inhibitors for thyroid hormone receptor α and β.

Authors:  Manish Kumar Gupta; Krishna Misra
Journal:  J Mol Model       Date:  2014-06-05       Impact factor: 1.810

6.  Molecular mechanism of activation of human musk receptors OR5AN1 and OR1A1 by (R)-muscone and diverse other musk-smelling compounds.

Authors:  Lucky Ahmed; Yuetian Zhang; Eric Block; Michael Buehl; Michael J Corr; Rodrigo A Cormanich; Sivaji Gundala; Hiroaki Matsunami; David O'Hagan; Mehmet Ozbil; Yi Pan; Sivakumar Sekharan; Nicholas Ten; Mingan Wang; Mingyan Yang; Qingzhi Zhang; Ruina Zhang; Victor S Batista; Hanyi Zhuang
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2018-04-09       Impact factor: 11.205

7.  Pharmacophore modeling and 3D-QSAR analysis of phosphoinositide 3-kinase p110alpha inhibitors.

Authors:  Yiping Li; Yawen Wang; Fuqiang Zhang
Journal:  J Mol Model       Date:  2010-02-19       Impact factor: 1.810

8.  Pharmacophore modeling and 3D quantitative structure-activity relationship analysis of febrifugine analogues as potent antimalarial agent.

Authors:  Debanjan Sen; Tapan Kumar Chatterjee
Journal:  J Adv Pharm Technol Res       Date:  2013-01

9.  Ligand-based Pharmacophore Modeling; Atom-based 3D-QSAR Analysis and Molecular Docking Studies of Phosphoinositide-Dependent Kinase-1 Inhibitors.

Authors:  P Kirubakaran; K Muthusamy; K H D Singh; S Nagamani
Journal:  Indian J Pharm Sci       Date:  2012-03       Impact factor: 0.975

10.  A combination of 3D-QSAR, molecular docking and molecular dynamics simulation studies of benzimidazole-quinolinone derivatives as iNOS inhibitors.

Authors:  Hao Zhang; Jinhang Zan; Guangyun Yu; Ming Jiang; Peixun Liu
Journal:  Int J Mol Sci       Date:  2012-09-10       Impact factor: 6.208

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.