Protein-based virtual screening of chemical databases. 1. Evaluation of different docking/scoring combinations.

By C. Bissantz, G. Folkers, Didier Rognan. Journal of Medicinal Chemistry, 2000

685 citations recorded by the source corpus.

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

A detailed comparison of current docking and scoring methods on systems of pharmaceutical relevance (2004, background): “tend to give better predictions in certain types of binding sites.(7,8,11) This dependence should be properly weighted when a secondary function for rescoring is selected.”
iGEMDOCK: a graphical environment of enhancing GEMDOCK using pharmacological interactions and post-screening analysis (2011, neutral): “[21] for each therapeutic protein target.”
Computational drug discovery (2012, methodology): “A validation test docking known inhibitors into the binding pockets of thymidine kinase (TK) and HIV-1 reverse RT indicated that GAsDock is more accurate than other docking programs, such as GOLD [33] , FlexX [33] , DOCK [33] , Surflex [30] , and Glide [29] .”
Comparative evaluation of eight docking tools for docking and virtual screening accuracy (2004, background): “26,29,32,35,42 We even reported discrepancies be-tween docking and screening accuracies, 26 which is rather frustrating in a structure-based screening approach.”