Skip to main content
. 2021 May 31;11:11325. doi: 10.1038/s41598-021-90923-y

Table 2.

Comparison on the drug response prediction performance of different data representations and prediction models.

Dataset Prediction model Data representation R2 P-value
CTRP LightGBM Tabular data 0.825 (0.003) 8.19E−20
Random forest 0.786 (0.003) 5.97E−26
tDNN 0.834 (0.004) 7.90E−18
sDNN 0.832 (0.005) 1.09E−16
CNN IGTD images 0.856 (0.003)
REFINED images 0.855 (0.003) 8.77E−01
DeepInsight images 0.846 (0.004) 7.02E−10
GDSC LightGBM Tabular data 0.718 (0.006) 2.06E−13
Random forest 0.682 (0.006) 4.53E−19
tDNN 0.734 (0.009) 1.79E−03
sDNN 0.723 (0.008) 6.04E−10
CNN IGTD images 0.74 (0.006)
REFINED images 0.739 (0.007) 5.93E−01
DeepInsight images 0.731 (0.008) 2.96E−06

In the R2 column, the number before parenthesis is the average R2 across 20 cross-validation trials, and the number in the parenthesis is the standard deviation. Bold indicates the highest average R2 obtained on each dataset. P-value is obtained via the two-tail pairwise t-test to compare the performance of CNNs trained on IGTD images with those of other combinations of prediction models and data representations.