2003
DOI: 10.1002/3527601813.ch1
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Prediction of Non‐bonded Interactions in Drug Design

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
7
0
6

Year Published

2007
2007
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
4
2
1

Relationship

0
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 17 publications
(13 citation statements)
references
References 64 publications
0
7
0
6
Order By: Relevance
“…In the preceding section, we observed that all ligands have large binding energies. According to the lock‐and‐key paradigm, tight protein–ligand binding requires46 (a) high steric complementarity between the protein and the ligand, (b) high complementarity of the surface properties between the protein and the ligand, and (c) energetically favorable conformation of the ligand in the binding pocket. The paradigm is a useful basis to understand and predict binding between a protein and a ligand.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In the preceding section, we observed that all ligands have large binding energies. According to the lock‐and‐key paradigm, tight protein–ligand binding requires46 (a) high steric complementarity between the protein and the ligand, (b) high complementarity of the surface properties between the protein and the ligand, and (c) energetically favorable conformation of the ligand in the binding pocket. The paradigm is a useful basis to understand and predict binding between a protein and a ligand.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…B. 80 [130] oder sogar 170 [135] Die Additivität einzelner Wechselwirkungen [138] hat sich schon früh bei quantitativen Struktur-Eigenschafts-Beziehungen (QSPR, quantitative structure-property relations) gezeigt; [139] bei Wechselwirkungen mit Wirt-Gast-Komplexen und mit biologischen Systemen spricht man dabei eher von QSAR (quantitative structure-activity relations). [140] In der Regel verwendet man einen möglichst großen Satz von experimentellen Daten als Trainingsdatensatz, unter Umstän-den unterstützt durch neue Methoden des Data-Mining.…”
Section: Quantifizierung Von Bindungsbeiträgen In Lösungunclassified
“…[129] Analysen von über 70 Proteinkomplexen ergaben ebenfalls DDG-Werte von etwa 5 kJ mol À1 . [130] 3.4. LFER-und QSPR/QSAR-Verfahren, Analysen bei Proteinkomplexen…”
Section: Messungen An Molekülen Mit Mutierten Bindungszentrenunclassified
“…[37][38][39] Although there may be a correlation between the higher hydrophobicity of AHTC relative to other TC derivatives 16,17) and the higher affinity, further contributions such as electrostatic forces should be considered. [40][41][42] Indeed, the relevance of electrostatic interaction in TC binding to BSA has been discussed previously. 31) Thus, the species distribution profile as a function of pH (Fig.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%