LigandFit: a novel method for the shape-directed rapid docking of ligands to protein active sites.

By C. Venkatachalam, X. Jiang, Thomas J. Oldfield, M. Waldman. 2003

918 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.

Molecular Docking and Structure-Based Drug Design Strategies (2015, methodology): “…Search eHiTS [28] AutoDock [34] FRED [30] Gold [35] Surflex-Dock [31] PRO_LEADS [44] DOCK [32] EADock [45] GLIDE [37] ICM [46] EUDOC [38] LigandFit [47] FlexX [39] Molegro Virtual Docker [48] Hammerhead [40] CDocker [49] Flog [41] GlamDock [50] SLIDE [42] PLANTS [51] ADAM [43] MolDock [52]…”
Software for molecular docking: a review (2017, methodology): “…(Rarey et al. 1996), Surflex (Jain 2003), GOLD (Jones et al. 1997), ICM (Schapira et al. 2003), Glide (Friesner et al. 2004), Cdocker, LigandFit (Venkatachalam et al. 2003), MCDock, FRED (McGann et al. 2003), MOE-Dock (Corbeil et al. 2012), LeDock (Zhao and Caflisch 2013), AutoDock Vina (Trott…”
Protein-ligand docking in the new millennium--a retrospective of 10 years in the field. (2013, background): “Historically, most of these comparisons have been made in terms of their ability to reproduce the X-ray pose of selected ligands [8, 18, 21, 32-50], their capability to predict binding free energies from the best-scored pose [16, 21, 24, 27, 28, 35, 51-56], or their ability to identify known binders”
Advances and Challenges in Protein-Ligand Docking (2010, methodology): “Examples of docking programs that use shape matching include DOCK [1], FRED [44], FLOG [45], EUDOC [46], LigandFit [47], Surflex [48], MS-DOCK [49], and MDock [32,33].”