Interpretation of CoMFA results - A probe set study using hydrophobic fields

Quantitative Structure-Activity Relationships

Volumn 18, Issue 4, 1999, Pages 369-379

  Pajeva, Ilza K ^a   Wiese, Michael ^b  

^a BULGARIAN ACADEMY OF SCIENCES   (Bulgaria)

^b MARTIN LUTHER UNIVERSITY HALLE WITTENBERG   (Germany)

Author keywords

CoMFA field interpretation; HINT; Hydrophobicity; LogP

Indexed keywords

PHYSICAL CHEMISTRY;

ABSOLUTE VALUES; COMFA FIELD INTERPRETATION; DATA SET; FIELD MODEL; HINT; HYDROPHOBICS; LOGP; PREDICTIVE MODELS; PROPERTY; STERICS;

HYDROPHOBICITY;

ANALYSIS; ARTICLE; HYDROPHOBICITY; PREDICTION; PRIORITY JOURNAL; VARIANCE;

EID: 0032743366     PISSN: 09318771     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/(SICI)1521-3838(199910)18:4<369::AID-QSAR369>3.0.CO;2-F     Document Type: Article

References (10)

1. SYBYL Manuals, Ligand-Based Design, 1996, p. 232.
2. Pajeva, I.K. and Wiese, M., Molecular modeling of phenothiazines and related drugs as multidrug resistance modifiers: a comparative molecular field analysis study, J. Med. Chem. 41, 1815-1826 (1998).
3. Pajeva, I.K. and Wiese, M., A comparative molecular field analysis of propafenone-type modulators of cancer multidrug resistance, Quant. Struct.-Act. Relat. 17, 301-312 (1998).
4. Leo, A., Methods for calculating partition coefficients, in: Comprehensive Medicinal Chemistry, Vol. 4, Hansch, C., Sammes, P.G., Taylor, J.B. (Eds.), Pergamon Press, Oxford 1990, pp. 295-319.
5. Tripos Ass., 1699 Hanley Road, St. Louis, Mo 63144, USA
6. HINT version 2.26S for Sybyl, Edusoft, LC, PO Box 1811, Ashland, VA 23005, USA.
7. ClogP Version 1.0 for Windows; Biobyte Corp. 1995.
8. Folkers, G., Merz, A. and Rognan, D., CoMFA: Scope and limitations, in: Kubinyi, H. (Ed.), 3D QSAR in Drug Design, Theory, Methods and Application, Escom, Leiden 1993, pp. 583-618.
9. Kellog, G.E., Semus, S.F. and Abraham, D.J., HINT: A new method of empirical hydrophobic field calculation for CoMFA, J. Comp.-Aided Mol. Design 5, 545-552 (1991).
10. Cramer, R.D., DePriest, S.A., Patterson, D.E. and Hecht, P., The developing practice of comparative molecular field analysis, in: Kubinyi, H. (Ed.), 3D QSAR in Drug Design, Theory, Methods and Application, Escom, Leiden 1993, pp. 443-485.