LaPro-DTA: Latent Dual-View Drug Representations and Salient Protein Feature Extraction for Generalizable Drug--Target Affinity Prediction

Predicting drug-target affinity is fundamental to virtual screening and lead optimization. However, existing deep models often suffer from representation collapse in stringent cold-start regimes, where the scarcity of labels and domain shifts prevent the learning of transferable pharmacophores and binding motifs. In this paper, we propose Co-Diffusion, a novel affinity-aware framework that redefines DTA prediction as a constrained latent denoising process to enhance generalization. Co-Diffusion employs a two-stage paradigm: Stage I establishes an affinity-steered latent manifold by aligning drug and target embeddings under an explicit supervised objective, ensuring that the latent space reflects the intrinsic binding landscape. Stage II introduces modality-specific latent diffusion as a stochastic perturb-and-denoise regularizer, forcing the model to recover consistent affinity semantics from noisy structural representations. This approach effectively mitigates the reconstruction-regression conflict common in generative DTA models. Theoretically, we show that Co-Diffusion maximizes a variational lower bound on the joint likelihood of drug structures, protein sequences, and binding strength. Extensive experiments across multiple benchmarks demonstrate that Co-Diffusion significantly outperforms state-of-the-art baselines, particularly yielding superior zero-shot generalization on unseen molecular scaffolds and novel protein families-paving a robust path for in silico drug prioritization in unexplored chemical spaces.

Predicting drug--target binding affinity (DTA) requires models to distinguish subtle chemical and structural determinants underlying molecular recognition. Although recent approaches increasingly incorporate richer drug and protein information, such information may be compressed, homogenized or discretized during representation construction, causing affinity-relevant distinctions to be lost before interaction modelling. We hypothesized that this representation-stage information loss constitutes an upstream bottleneck that cannot be reliably overcome by increasingly complex interaction predictors. To test this hypothesis, we developed ReGeoDTA, a representation-preserving framework that maintains affinity-relevant chemical heterogeneity in molecular representations and continuous geometric relationships in protein structures. Across three benchmark datasets, ReGeoDTA consistently improved affinity prediction, and the proposed representation-preserving strategies retained their benefits across diverse DTA architectures. Controlled representation degradation progressively reduced predictive performance, whereas increasing downstream predictor complexity failed to recover information lost during representation construction. These findings identify representation fidelity as an upstream design principle for accurate and generalizable drug--target affinity prediction, with potential implications for computational compound prioritization.

Drug-target affinity (DTA) prediction is widely used to prioritize candidate compounds before costly experimental screening. DTA models are often compared under a single data split, even though deployment may require extrapolation to new chemical series, new protein targets, or both. We ask whether the distribution shift used for evaluation changes which architecture appears best. We curate 718,800 unique drug-protein pairs from the ChEMBL and BindingDB datasets. We compare a Morgan-fingerprint + protein-CNN baseline with 12 controlled architectures that combine four drug representations with three ESM-2 interaction modes. Mean validation RMSE increases from 0.950 and 0.945 under scaffold and fingerprint-cluster OOD to 1.299 and 1.321 under protein-cluster and dual OOD. Model rankings are similar across the two chemical shifts (tau = 0.79), but agreement with scaffold OOD falls under protein OOD (tau = 0.39) and reverses under dual OOD (tau = -0.55). Held-out evaluation, repeated seeds, group-aware bootstrap analysis, and a size-matched control support the same conclusion: architecture selection depends on the form of extrapolation, not only on average error or training-set size. DTA benchmarks should therefore match the chemical and target shifts expected at deployment.