Explainability methods from machine learning detect important drugs' atoms in drug-target interactions
Mahindran, M.; Liu, Q.; Kadambalithaya, V. M.; Kalinina, O. V.
Show abstract
Predicting drug-target interactions (DTI) with graph neural networks (GNNs) is hindered by their lack of interpretability. To address this, we benchmark four explainable artificial intelligence (XAI) attribution methods on GNN models trained for kinase and GPCR targets. We assess the methods consistency through atom-level intersection-over-union and validate their biological relevance by mapping attributed atoms to 3D protein-ligand structures. While consistency across methods was modest, consensus attributions were highly enriched for atoms directly contacting the binding pocket--up to 76% within 2 [A] in the kinase-inhibitor complexes. Notably, these attributed atoms were frequently found contacting experimentally important regulatory residues, such as those in the DFG motif. This indicates that XAI methods, despite their disagreements, can identify chemically meaningful ligand features, providing a foundation for developing more interpretable GNNs in drug discovery.
Matching journals
The top 1 journal accounts for 50% of the predicted probability mass.
Similar papers in this journal
- Graph Attention Site Prediction (GrASP): Identifying Druggable Binding Sites Using Graph Neural Networks with Attention 98%
- Dataset Augmentation Allows Deep Learning-Based Virtual Screening To Better Generalize To Unseen Target Classes, And Highlight Important Binding Interactions 98%
- BOLD-GPCRs: A Transformer-Powered App for Predicting Ligand Bioactivity and Mutational Effects Across Class A GPCRs 97%
Similar papers in this journal
Similar papers in this journal
Similar papers in this journal
- Controlling astrocyte-mediated synaptic pruning signals for schizophrenia drug repurposing with Deep Graph Networks 95%
- Controllable Protein Design via Autoregressive Direct Coupling Analysis Conditioned on Principal Components 94%
- From complete cross-docking to partners identification and binding sites predictions 94%
Similar papers in this journal
"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.