Assesses drug response prediction across various datasets, suggesting enhanced interpretability and performance.
Background For translational impact, both accurate drug response prediction and biological plausibility of predictive features are needed. We present drGT , a heterogeneous graph deep learning model over drugs, genes, and cell lines that couples prediction with mechanism-oriented interpretability via attention coefficients (ACs). Results We assess both predictive generalization (random, unseen-drug, unseen-cell, and zero-shot splits) and biological plausibility (use of text-mined PubMed gene-drug co-mentions and comparison to a structure-based DTI predictor) on GDSC, NCI60, and CTRP datasets. Across benchmarks, drGT consistently delivers top regression performance while maintaining competitive classification accuracy for drug sensitivity. Under random 5-fold cross-validation, drGT attains an AUROC of up to 0.945 (3rd overall) and an R² up to 0.690, outperforming all baselines on regression. In leave-one-out tests for unseen cell lines and drugs, drGT achieves AUROCs of 0.706 and 0.844, and R² values of 0.692 and 0.022, the only model yielding positive R² for unseen drugs. In zero-shot prediction, drGT achieves an AUROC of 0.786 and a regression R² of 0.334, both representing the highest scores among all models. For interpretability, AC-derived drug-gene links recover known biology: among 976 drugs with known DTIs, 36.9% of predicted links match established DTIs, and 63.7% are supported by either PubMed abstracts or a structure-based predictive model. Enrichment analyses of AC-prioritized genes reveal drug-perturbed biological processes, providing pathway-level explanations. Conclusions drGT advances predictive generalization and mechanism-centered interpretability, offering state-of-the-art regression accuracy and literature-supported biological hypotheses that demonstrate the use of graph learning from heterogeneous input data for biological discovery. Code: https://github.com/sciluna/drGT .
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Inoue et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: