ACS Publications. Most Trusted. Most Cited. Most Read

OR SEARCH CITATIONS

My Activity
Publications
CONTENT TYPES

Figure 1Loading Img
Download Hi-Res ImageDownload to MS-PowerPointCite This:J. Chem. Inf. Model. 2012, 52, 12, 3263-3277
RETURN TO ISSUEPREVArticleNEXT

Current Assessment of Docking into GPCR Crystal Structures and Homology Models: Successes, Challenges, and Guidelines

View Author Information
† Schrödinger, Inc., 120 West 45th Street, New York, New York, United States
*E-mail: [email protected]. Phone: 212 295 5800. Fax: 212 295 5801.
Cite this: J. Chem. Inf. Model. 2012, 52, 12, 3263–3277
Publication Date (Web):November 3, 2012
https://doi.org/10.1021/ci300411b
Copyright © 2012 American Chemical Society
RIGHTS & PERMISSIONS

Article Views

2865

Altmetric

-

Citations

73
LEARN ABOUT THESE METRICS
Read OnlinePDF (3 MB)
Get e-Alerts
Supporting Info (1)»
SUBJECTS:

Abstract

Abstract Image

The growing availability of novel structures for several G protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs) has provided new opportunities for structure-based drug design of ligands against this important class of targets. Here, we report a systematic analysis of the accuracy of docking small molecules into GPCR structures and homology models using both rigid receptor (Glide SP and Glide XP) and flexible receptor (Induced Fit Docking; IFD) methods. The ability to dock ligands into different structures of the same target (cross-docking) is evaluated for both agonist and inverse agonist structures of the A2A receptor and the β1- and β2-adrenergic receptors. In addition, we have produced homology models for the β1-adrenergic, β2-adrenergic, D3 dopamine, H1 histamine, M2 muscarine, M3 muscarine, A2A adenosine, S1P1, κ-opioid, and C-X-C chemokine 4 receptors using multiple templates and investigated the ability of docking to predict the binding mode of ligands in these models. Clear correlations are observed between the docking accuracy and the similarity of the sequence of interest to the template, suggesting regimes in which docking can correctly identify ligand binding modes.

Supporting Information

ARTICLE SECTIONS
Jump To

Full RMSD results for all methods and benchmarks are available as Tables S1–S9. A comparison of the performance of all methods with and without loops is shown in Table S10. Pairwise sequence identities for the full sequences are shown in Table S11. Rigid docking example poses are provided in Figures S1 and S2. A correlation plot between docking RMSD and binding site RMSD is shown in Figure S3. This material is available free of charge via the Internet at http://pubs.acs.org.

Accession Codes

PDB ID Codes:2VT4, 2YCW, 2Y00, 2Y02, 2Y03, 2Y04, 2RH1, 3D4S, 3NY8, 3NY9, 3NYA, 3P0G, 3PBL, 3RZE, 3UON, 4DAJ, 3EML, 3REY, 3RFM, 2YDO, 2YDV, 3QAK, 3V2Y, 3ODU, 4DHJ, 4DKL

Terms & Conditions

Most electronic Supporting Information files are available without a subscription to ACS Web Editions. Such files may be downloaded by article for research use (if there is a public use license linked to the relevant article, that license may permit other uses). Permission may be obtained from ACS for other uses through requests via the RightsLink permission system: http://pubs.acs.org/page/copyright/permissions.html.

Cited By

This article is cited by 73 publications.

  1. Thijs Beuming, Helena Martín, Anna M. Díaz-Rovira, Lucía Díaz, Victor Guallar, Soumya S. Ray. Are Deep Learning Structural Models Sufficiently Accurate for Free-Energy Calculations? Application of FEP+ to AlphaFold2-Predicted Structures. Journal of Chemical Information and Modeling 2022, 62 (18) , 4351-4360. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.jcim.2c00796
  2. Jakob Schneider, Ksenia Korshunova, Zeineb Si Chaib, Alejandro Giorgetti, Mercedes Alfonso-Prieto, Paolo Carloni. Ligand Pose Predictions for Human G Protein-Coupled Receptors: Insights from the Amber-Based Hybrid Molecular Mechanics/Coarse-Grained Approach. Journal of Chemical Information and Modeling 2020, 60 (10) , 5103-5116. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.jcim.0c00661
  3. Haiyi Chen, Weitao Fu, Zhe Wang, Xuwen Wang, Tailong Lei, Feng Zhu, Dan Li, Shan Chang, Lei Xu, Tingjun Hou. Reliability of Docking-Based Virtual Screening for GPCR Ligands with Homology Modeled Structures: A Case Study of the Angiotensin II Type I Receptor. ACS Chemical Neuroscience 2019, 10 (1) , 677-689. https://doi.org/10.1021/acschemneuro.8b00489
  4. Daniel Cappel, Michelle Lynn Hall, Eelke B. Lenselink, Thijs Beuming, Jun Qi, James Bradner, and Woody Sherman . Relative Binding Free Energy Calculations Applied to Protein Homology Models. Journal of Chemical Information and Modeling 2016, 56 (12) , 2388-2400. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.jcim.6b00362
  5. Antonella Ciancetta, Alberto Cuzzolin, and Stefano Moro . Alternative Quality Assessment Strategy to Compare Performances of GPCR-Ligand Docking Protocols: The Human Adenosine A2A Receptor as a Case Study. Journal of Chemical Information and Modeling 2014, 54 (8) , 2243-2254. https://doi.org/10.1021/ci5002857
  6. Paul C. D. Hawkins, Brian P. Kelley, and Gregory L. Warren . The Application of Statistical Methods to Cognate Docking: A Path Forward?. Journal of Chemical Information and Modeling 2014, 54 (5) , 1339-1355. https://doi.org/10.1021/ci5001086
  7. Darius. P. Zlotos, Ralf Jockers, Erika Cecon, Silvia Rivara, and Paula A. Witt-Enderby . MT1 and MT2 Melatonin Receptors: Ligands, Models, Oligomers, and Therapeutic Potential. Journal of Medicinal Chemistry 2014, 57 (8) , 3161-3185. https://doi.org/10.1021/jm401343c
  8. Trayder Thomas, Kimberley C. McLean, Fiona M. McRobb, David T. Manallack, David K. Chalmers, and Elizabeth Yuriev . Homology Modeling of Human Muscarinic Acetylcholine Receptors. Journal of Chemical Information and Modeling 2014, 54 (1) , 243-253. https://doi.org/10.1021/ci400502u
  9. Ákos Tarcsay, Gábor Paragi, Márton Vass, Balázs Jójárt, Ferenc Bogár, and György M. Keserű . The Impact of Molecular Dynamics Sampling on the Performance of Virtual Screening against GPCRs. Journal of Chemical Information and Modeling 2013, 53 (11) , 2990-2999. https://doi.org/10.1021/ci400087b
  10. Daniele Pala, Thijs Beuming, Woody Sherman, Alessio Lodola, Silvia Rivara, and Marco Mor . Structure-Based Virtual Screening of MT2 Melatonin Receptor: Influence of Template Choice and Structural Refinement. Journal of Chemical Information and Modeling 2013, 53 (4) , 821-835. https://doi.org/10.1021/ci4000147
  11. Eleonora Alfinito, Rosella Cataldo, Jean-Francois Millithaler. In silico studies of macromolecules as sensors. 2023, 533-565. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-323-90995-2.00024-2
  12. AyoOluwa O. Aderibigbe, Pankaj Pandey, Robert J. Doerksen. Negative allosteric modulators of cannabinoid receptor 1: Ternary complexes including CB1, orthosteric CP55940 and allosteric ORG27569. Journal of Biomolecular Structure and Dynamics 2022, 40 (13) , 5729-5747. https://doi.org/10.1080/07391102.2021.1873187
  13. Lan Zhu, Xiaoyu Chen, Enrique E. Abola, Liang Jing, Wei Liu. Serial Crystallography for Structure-Based Drug Discovery. Trends in Pharmacological Sciences 2020, 41 (11) , 830-839. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tips.2020.08.009
  14. Mei Qian Yau, Abigail L. Emtage, Jason S. E. Loo. Benchmarking the performance of MM/PBSA in virtual screening enrichment using the GPCR-Bench dataset. Journal of Computer-Aided Molecular Design 2020, 34 (11) , 1133-1145. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10822-020-00339-5
  15. Jakob Schneider, Rui Ribeiro, Mercedes Alfonso-Prieto, Paolo Carloni, Alejandro Giorgetti. Hybrid MM/CG Webserver: Automatic Set Up of Molecular Mechanics/Coarse-Grained Simulations for Human G Protein-Coupled Receptor/Ligand Complexes. Frontiers in Molecular Biosciences 2020, 7 https://doi.org/10.3389/fmolb.2020.576689
  16. Hanna V. Dudko, Viktar A. Urban, Alexander I. Davidovskii, Valery G. Veresov. Structure-based modeling of turnover of Bcl-2 family proteins bound to voltage-dependent anion channel 2 (VDAC2): Implications for the mechanisms of proapoptotic activation of Bak and Bax in vivo. Computational Biology and Chemistry 2020, 85 , 107203. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compbiolchem.2020.107203
  17. Pratanphorn Nakliang, Raudah Lazim, Hyerim Chang, Sun Choi. Multiscale Molecular Modeling in G Protein-Coupled Receptor (GPCR)-Ligand Studies. Biomolecules 2020, 10 (4) , 631. https://doi.org/10.3390/biom10040631
  18. Lu Qu, Qingtong Zhou, Yueming Xu, Yu Guo, Xiaoyu Chen, Deqiang Yao, Gye Won Han, Zhi-Jie Liu, Raymond C. Stevens, Guisheng Zhong, Dong Wu, Suwen Zhao. Structural Basis of the Diversity of Adrenergic Receptors. Cell Reports 2019, 29 (10) , 2929-2935.e4. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.celrep.2019.10.088
  19. Fabrizio Fierro, Alejandro Giorgetti, Paolo Carloni, Wolfgang Meyerhof, Mercedes Alfonso-Prieto. Dual binding mode of “bitter sugars” to their human bitter taste receptor target. Scientific Reports 2019, 9 (1) https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-019-44805-z
  20. . The Dopaminergic System. 2019, 1-39. https://doi.org/10.1002/9783527813421.ch1
  21. Mingzhi Luo, Kai Ni, Yang Jin, Zifan Yu, Linhong Deng. Toward the Identification of Extra-Oral TAS2R Agonists as Drug Agents for Muscle Relaxation Therapies via Bioinformatics-Aided Screening of Bitter Compounds in Traditional Chinese Medicine. Frontiers in Physiology 2019, 10 https://doi.org/10.3389/fphys.2019.00861
  22. Jason S. E. Loo, Abigail L. Emtage, Lahari Murali, Sze Siew Lee, Alvina L. W. Kueh, Stephen P. H. Alexander. Ligand discrimination during virtual screening of the CB1 cannabinoid receptor crystal structures following cross-docking and microsecond molecular dynamics simulations. RSC Advances 2019, 9 (28) , 15949-15956. https://doi.org/10.1039/C9RA01095E
  23. Mercedes Alfonso-Prieto, Luciano Navarini, Paolo Carloni. Understanding Ligand Binding to G-Protein Coupled Receptors Using Multiscale Simulations. Frontiers in Molecular Biosciences 2019, 6 https://doi.org/10.3389/fmolb.2019.00029
  24. Mei Qian Yau, Abigail L. Emtage, Nathaniel J. Y. Chan, Stephen W. Doughty, Jason S. E. Loo. Evaluating the performance of MM/PBSA for binding affinity prediction using class A GPCR crystal structures. Journal of Computer-Aided Molecular Design 2019, 33 (5) , 487-496. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10822-019-00201-3
  25. Christian A. Söldner, Anselm H. C. Horn, Heinrich Sticht. A Metadynamics-Based Protocol for the Determination of GPCR-Ligand Binding Modes. International Journal of Molecular Sciences 2019, 20 (8) , 1970. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijms20081970
  26. Paige N. Castleman, Chandler K. Sears, Judith A. Cole, Daniel L. Baker, Abby L. Parrill. GPCR homology model template selection benchmarking: Global versus local similarity measures. Journal of Molecular Graphics and Modelling 2019, 86 , 235-246. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmgm.2018.10.016
  27. Jason S.E. Loo, Abigail L. Emtage, Kar Weng Ng, Alene S.J. Yong, Stephen W. Doughty. Assessing GPCR homology models constructed from templates of various transmembrane sequence identities: Binding mode prediction and docking enrichment. Journal of Molecular Graphics and Modelling 2018, 80 , 38-47. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmgm.2017.12.017
  28. Jakob Schneider, Ksenia Korshunova, Francesco Musiani, Mercedes Alfonso-Prieto, Alejandro Giorgetti, Paolo Carloni. Predicting ligand binding poses for low-resolution membrane protein models: Perspectives from multiscale simulations. Biochemical and Biophysical Research Communications 2018, 498 (2) , 366-374. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bbrc.2018.01.160
  29. Jason B. Cross. Methods for Virtual Screening of GPCR Targets: Approaches and Challenges. 2018, 233-264. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4939-7465-8_11
  30. Christofer S. Tautermann. GPCR Homology Model Generation for Lead Optimization. 2018, 115-131. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4939-7465-8_5
  31. Fabrizio Fierro, Eda Suku, Mercedes Alfonso-Prieto, Alejandro Giorgetti, Sven Cichon, Paolo Carloni. Agonist Binding to Chemosensory Receptors: A Systematic Bioinformatics Analysis. Frontiers in Molecular Biosciences 2017, 4 https://doi.org/10.3389/fmolb.2017.00063
  32. Damian Bartuzi, Agnieszka Kaczor, Katarzyna Targowska-Duda, Dariusz Matosiuk. Recent Advances and Applications of Molecular Docking to G Protein-Coupled Receptors. Molecules 2017, 22 (2) , 340. https://doi.org/10.3390/molecules22020340
  33. Andrea Strasser, Hans-Joachim Wittmann. Molecular Modelling Approaches for the Analysis of Histamine Receptors and Their Interaction with Ligands. 2017, 31-61. https://doi.org/10.1007/164_2016_113
  34. M. Congreve, A. Bortolato, G. Brown, R.M. Cooke. Modeling and Design for Membrane Protein Targets. 2017, 145-188. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-409547-2.12358-3
  35. Durba Sengupta, Krushna Sonar, Manali Joshi. Characterizing clinically relevant natural variants of GPCRs using computational approaches. 2017, 187-204. https://doi.org/10.1016/bs.mcb.2017.07.013
  36. Róbert Kiss, György M. Keserű. Structure-based discovery and binding site analysis of histamine receptor ligands. Expert Opinion on Drug Discovery 2016, 11 (12) , 1165-1185. https://doi.org/10.1080/17460441.2016.1245288
  37. Jinqiang Hou, Carlie L. Charron, Milan M. Fowkes, Leonard G. Luyt. Bridging computational modeling with amino acid replacements to investigate GHS-R1a-peptidomimetic recognition. European Journal of Medicinal Chemistry 2016, 123 , 822-833. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejmech.2016.07.078
  38. Tony Ngo, Irina Kufareva, James LJ Coleman, Robert M Graham, Ruben Abagyan, Nicola J Smith. Identifying ligands at orphan GPCRs: current status using structure-based approaches. British Journal of Pharmacology 2016, 173 (20) , 2934-2951. https://doi.org/10.1111/bph.13452
  39. Michael Stocks, Lilian Alcaraz. Lead Generation Approaches Delivering Inhaled β 2 ‐Adrenoreceptor Agonist Drug Candidates. 2016, 575-596. https://doi.org/10.1002/9783527677047.ch20
  40. Agnieszka A. Kaczor, Ewelina Rutkowska, Damian Bartuzi, Katarzyna M. Targowska-Duda, Dariusz Matosiuk, Jana Selent. Computational methods for studying G protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs). 2016, 359-399. https://doi.org/10.1016/bs.mcb.2015.11.002
  41. Minsup Kim, Art E. Cho. Incorporating QM and solvation into docking for applications to GPCR targets. Physical Chemistry Chemical Physics 2016, 18 (40) , 28281-28289. https://doi.org/10.1039/C6CP04742D
  42. Trayder Thomas, David K. Chalmers, Elizabeth Yuriev. Homology Modeling and Docking Evaluation of Human Muscarinic Acetylcholine Receptors. 2016, 15-35. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4939-2858-3_2
  43. Christoffer Norn, Maria Hauge, Maja S. Engelstoft, Sun Hee Kim, Juerg Lehmann, Robert M. Jones, Thue W. Schwartz, Thomas M. Frimurer. Mutation-Guided Unbiased Modeling of the Fat Sensor GPR119 for High-Yield Agonist Screening. Structure 2015, 23 (12) , 2377-2386. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.str.2015.09.014
  44. Antonella Ciancetta, Davide Sabbadin, Stephanie Federico, Giampiero Spalluto, Stefano Moro. Advances in Computational Techniques to Study GPCR–Ligand Recognition. Trends in Pharmacological Sciences 2015, 36 (12) , 878-890. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tips.2015.08.006
  45. Jan Jakubík, Esam E. El-Fakahany, Vladimír Doležal. Towards predictive docking at aminergic G-protein coupled receptors. Journal of Molecular Modeling 2015, 21 (11) https://doi.org/10.1007/s00894-015-2824-9
  46. Sid Topiol, Michael Sabio. The role of experimental and computational structural approaches in 7TM drug discovery. Expert Opinion on Drug Discovery 2015, 10 (10) , 1071-1084. https://doi.org/10.1517/17460441.2015.1072166
  47. Elizabeth Yuriev, Jessica Holien, Paul A. Ramsland. Improvements, trends, and new ideas in molecular docking: 2012-2013 in review. Journal of Molecular Recognition 2015, 28 (10) , 581-604. https://doi.org/10.1002/jmr.2471
  48. Francesca Spyrakis, Claudio N. Cavasotto. Open challenges in structure-based virtual screening: Receptor modeling, target flexibility consideration and active site water molecules description. Archives of Biochemistry and Biophysics 2015, 583 , 105-119. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.abb.2015.08.002
  49. Bryan D. Cox, Anil K. Mehta, John O. DiRaddo, Dennis C. Liotta, Lawrence J. Wilson, James P. Snyder. Structural analysis of CXCR4 – Antagonist interactions using saturation-transfer double-difference NMR. Biochemical and Biophysical Research Communications 2015, 466 (1) , 28-32. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bbrc.2015.08.084
  50. Karl-Heinz Baringhaus, Gerhard Hessler. Virtual Screening. 2015, 251-280. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118771723.ch9
  51. Mikitaka Kinoshita, Tetsuji Okada. Structural conservation among the rhodopsin-like and other G protein-coupled receptors. Scientific Reports 2015, 5 (1) https://doi.org/10.1038/srep09176
  52. Edit Szőllősi, Amrita Bobok, László Kiss, Márton Vass, Dalma Kurkó, Sándor Kolok, András Visegrády, György M. Keserű. Cell-based and virtual fragment screening for adrenergic α2C receptor agonists. Bioorganic & Medicinal Chemistry 2015, 23 (14) , 3991-3999. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bmc.2015.01.013
  53. Gengyang Yuan, Nicholas G Gedeon, Tanner C Jankins, Graham B Jones. Novel approaches for targeting the adenosine A 2A receptor. Expert Opinion on Drug Discovery 2015, 10 (1) , 63-80. https://doi.org/10.1517/17460441.2015.971006
  54. Marie-Annick Persuy, Guenhaël Sanz, Anne Tromelin, Thierry Thomas-Danguin, Jean-François Gibrat, Edith Pajot-Augy. Mammalian Olfactory Receptors. 2015, 1-36. https://doi.org/10.1016/bs.pmbts.2014.11.001
  55. Mayako Michino, Thijs Beuming, Prashant Donthamsetti, Amy Hauck Newman, Jonathan A. Javitch, Lei Shi, . What Can Crystal Structures of Aminergic Receptors Tell Us about Designing Subtype-Selective Ligands?. Pharmacological Reviews 2015, 67 (1) , 198-213. https://doi.org/10.1124/pr.114.009944
  56. Mayako Michino, Lei Shi. Computational Approaches in the Structure–Function Studies of Dopamine Receptors. 2015, 31-42. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4939-2196-6_3
  57. Thijs Beuming, Bart Lenselink, Daniele Pala, Fiona McRobb, Matt Repasky, Woody Sherman. Docking and Virtual Screening Strategies for GPCR Drug Discovery. 2015, 251-276. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4939-2914-6_17
  58. Kavita Kumari Kakarala, Kaiser Jamil, Vinod Devaraji. Structure and putative signaling mechanism of Protease activated receptor 2 (PAR2) – A promising target for breast cancer. Journal of Molecular Graphics and Modelling 2014, 53 , 179-199. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmgm.2014.07.012
  59. Bryan D. Cox, Anthony R. Prosser, Brooke M. Katzman, Ana A. Alcaraz, Dennis C. Liotta, Lawrence J. Wilson, James P. Snyder. Anti-HIV Small-Molecule Binding in the Peptide Subpocket of the CXCR4:CVX15 Crystal Structure. ChemBioChem 2014, 15 (11) , 1614-1620. https://doi.org/10.1002/cbic.201402056
  60. Tobias Schmidt, Andreas Bergner, Torsten Schwede. Modelling three-dimensional protein structures for applications in drug design. Drug Discovery Today 2014, 19 (7) , 890-897. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.drudis.2013.10.027
  61. Krzysztof Rataj, Jagna Witek, Stefan Mordalski, Tomasz Kosciolek, Andrzej J. Bojarski. Impact of Template Choice on Homology Model Efficiency in Virtual Screening. Journal of Chemical Information and Modeling 2014, 54 (6) , 1661-1668. https://doi.org/10.1021/ci500001f
  62. Subha Kalyaanamoorthy, Yi-Ping Phoebe Chen. Modelling and enhanced molecular dynamics to steer structure-based drug discovery. Progress in Biophysics and Molecular Biology 2014, 114 (3) , 123-136. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pbiomolbio.2013.06.004
  63. Nikos S. Hatzakis. Single molecule insights on conformational selection and induced fit mechanism. Biophysical Chemistry 2014, 186 , 46-54. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bpc.2013.11.003
  64. Raymond J. Terryn, Helen W. German, Theresa M. Kummerer, Richard R. Sinden, J. Clayton Baum, Mark J. Novak. Novel computational study on π -stacking to understand mechanistic interactions of Tryptanthrin analogues with DNA. Toxicology Mechanisms and Methods 2014, 24 (1) , 73-79. https://doi.org/10.3109/15376516.2013.859194
  65. Guenhaël Sanz, Jean-François Gibrat, Edith Pajot-Augy. Olfactory Receptor Proteins. 2014, 47-68. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-017-8613-3_3
  66. Sid Topiol. X-ray structural information of GPCRs in drug design: what are the limitations and where do we go?. Expert Opinion on Drug Discovery 2013, 8 (6) , 607-620. https://doi.org/10.1517/17460441.2013.783815
  67. Yohsuke Hagiwara, Kazuki Ohno, Masazumi Kamohara, Jun Takasaki, Toshihiro Watanabe, Yoshifumi Fukunishi, Haruki Nakamura, Masaya Orita. Molecular modeling of vasopressin receptor and in silico screening of V1b receptor antagonists. Expert Opinion on Drug Discovery 2013, 8 (8) , 951-964. https://doi.org/10.1517/17460441.2013.799134
  68. Elisabet Gregori-Puigjané. Computational methods based on molecular shape. 2013, 120-132. https://doi.org/10.4155/ebo.13.183
  69. Elizabeth Dong Nguyen, Christoffer Norn, Thomas M. Frimurer, Jens Meiler, . Assessment and Challenges of Ligand Docking into Comparative Models of G-Protein Coupled Receptors. PLoS ONE 2013, 8 (7) , e67302. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0067302
  70. Miquel Duran-Frigola, Roberto Mosca, Patrick Aloy. Structural Systems Pharmacology: The Role of 3D Structures in Next-Generation Drug Development. Chemistry & Biology 2013, 20 (5) , 674-684. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chembiol.2013.03.004
  71. Stefano Costanzi. Modeling G protein-coupled receptors and their interactions with ligands. Current Opinion in Structural Biology 2013, 23 (2) , 185-190. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbi.2013.01.008
  72. Daniele Pala, Alessio Lodola, Annalida Bedini, Gilberto Spadoni, Silvia Rivara. Homology Models of Melatonin Receptors: Challenges and Recent Advances. International Journal of Molecular Sciences 2013, 14 (4) , 8093-8121. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijms14048093
  73. G. Madhavi Sastry, Matvey Adzhigirey, Tyler Day, Ramakrishna Annabhimoju, Woody Sherman. Protein and ligand preparation: parameters, protocols, and influence on virtual screening enrichments. Journal of Computer-Aided Molecular Design 2013, 27 (3) , 221-234. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10822-013-9644-8

Pair your accounts.

Export articles to Mendeley

Get article recommendations from ACS based on references in your Mendeley library.

Pair your accounts.

Export articles to Mendeley

Get article recommendations from ACS based on references in your Mendeley library.

You’ve supercharged your research process with ACS and Mendeley!

STEP 1:
Click to create an ACS ID

Please note: If you switch to a different device, you may be asked to login again with only your ACS ID.

Please note: If you switch to a different device, you may be asked to login again with only your ACS ID.

Please note: If you switch to a different device, you may be asked to login again with only your ACS ID.

MENDELEY PAIRING EXPIRED
Your Mendeley pairing has expired. Please reconnect