.png){kind=icon}
返回
3D QSAR methods: Phase and catalyst compared
.png){kind=icon}
PRE
AI
DOI：10.1021/ci7000082.png)
.png){kind=icon}
原文求助.png){kind=icon}
分享.png){kind=icon}
收藏
摘要
En 中文
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.
Keyword:
HUMAN GLUTAMINYL CYCLASE
MOLECULAR-FIELD ANALYSIS
SYNTHASE KINASE-3 GSK-3
POTENT INHIBITORS
BIOLOGICAL-ACTIVITY
PHARMACOPHORE MODELS
GENETIC ALGORITHM
CDK INHIBITORS
DATABASE
BINDING
期刊
IF:
5.3
论文数:
9.1K
被引数:
4.0W
机构
暂无机构信息
引用论文
.png){kind=icon}
分享收藏Comparison of conformational analysis techniques to generate pharmacophore hypotheses using catalyst
PREAI
分享收藏COMPARATIVE MOLECULAR-FIELD ANALYSIS (COMFA) .1. EFFECT OF SHAPE ON BINDING OF STEROIDS TO CARRIER PROTEINS比较分子场分析 (COMFA) 1.形状对类固醇与载体蛋白结合的影响
PREAI
分享收藏
查看更多内容