538
S. von Grafenstein et al.
125. Amaro R, Cheng L, McCammon JA, Li WW, Arzberber PW (2009) Ensemble-based virtual
screening reveals novel antiviral compounds for avian influenza neuraminidase. US Patent
WO2009128964 22 Jan 2009
126. Proctor EA, Yin S, Tropsha A, Dokholyan NV (2012) Discrete molecular dynamics distinguishes native like binding poses from decoys in difficult targets. Biophys J 102(1):144–151.
doi:10.1016/j.bpj.2011.11.4008
127. Wallnoefer H, Fox T, Liedl K (2010) Challenges for computer simulations in drug design.
In: Paneth P, Dybala-Defratyka A (eds) Kinetics and dynamics, challenges and advances in
computational chemistry and physics. Springer Netherlands, Dordrecht, pp 431–463
128. Honig B, Nicholls A (1995) Classical electrostatics in biology and chemistry. Science
268(5214):1144–1149. doi:10.1126/science.7761829
129. Still WC, Tempczyk A, Hawley RC, Hendrickson T (1990) Semianalytical treatment of
solvation for molecular mechanics and dynamics. J Am Chem Soc 112(16):6127–6129.
doi:10.1021/ja00172a038
130. Negri M, Recanatini M, Hartmann RW (2011) Computational investigation of the binding mode of bis(hydroxylphenyl)arenes in 17 beta-HSD1: molecular dynamics simulations,
MM-PBSA free energy calculations, and molecular electrostatic potential maps. J ComputAided Mol Des 25(9):795–811. doi:10.1007/s10822-011-9464-7
131. Aqvist J, Medina C, Samuelsson JE (1994) New method for predicting binding-affinity in
computer-aided drug design. Protein Eng 7(3):385–391. doi:10.1093/protein/7.3.385
132. Stjernschantz E, Oostenbrink C (2010) Improved ligand-protein binding affinity predictions
using multiple binding modes. Biophys J 98(11):2682–2691. doi:10.1016/j.bpj.2010.02.034
S. von Grafenstein et al.
125. Amaro R, Cheng L, McCammon JA, Li WW, Arzberber PW (2009) Ensemble-based virtual
screening reveals novel antiviral compounds for avian influenza neuraminidase. US Patent
WO2009128964 22 Jan 2009
126. Proctor EA, Yin S, Tropsha A, Dokholyan NV (2012) Discrete molecular dynamics distinguishes native like binding poses from decoys in difficult targets. Biophys J 102(1):144–151.
doi:10.1016/j.bpj.2011.11.4008
127. Wallnoefer H, Fox T, Liedl K (2010) Challenges for computer simulations in drug design.
In: Paneth P, Dybala-Defratyka A (eds) Kinetics and dynamics, challenges and advances in
computational chemistry and physics. Springer Netherlands, Dordrecht, pp 431–463
128. Honig B, Nicholls A (1995) Classical electrostatics in biology and chemistry. Science
268(5214):1144–1149. doi:10.1126/science.7761829
129. Still WC, Tempczyk A, Hawley RC, Hendrickson T (1990) Semianalytical treatment of
solvation for molecular mechanics and dynamics. J Am Chem Soc 112(16):6127–6129.
doi:10.1021/ja00172a038
130. Negri M, Recanatini M, Hartmann RW (2011) Computational investigation of the binding mode of bis(hydroxylphenyl)arenes in 17 beta-HSD1: molecular dynamics simulations,
MM-PBSA free energy calculations, and molecular electrostatic potential maps. J ComputAided Mol Des 25(9):795–811. doi:10.1007/s10822-011-9464-7
131. Aqvist J, Medina C, Samuelsson JE (1994) New method for predicting binding-affinity in
computer-aided drug design. Protein Eng 7(3):385–391. doi:10.1093/protein/7.3.385
132. Stjernschantz E, Oostenbrink C (2010) Improved ligand-protein binding affinity predictions
using multiple binding modes. Biophys J 98(11):2682–2691. doi:10.1016/j.bpj.2010.02.034