Personalized cancer
treatment requires a thorough understanding
of complex interactions between drugs and cancer cell lines in varying
genetic and molecular contexts. To address this, high-throughput screening
has been used to generate large-scale drug response data, facilitating
data-driven computational models. Such models can capture complex
drug–cell line interactions across various contexts in a fully
data-driven manner. However, accurately prioritizing the most effective
drugs for each cell line still remains a significant challenge. To
address this, we developed multiple neural ranking approaches that
leverage large-scale drug response data across multiple cell lines
from diverse cancer types. Unlike existing approaches that primarily
utilize regression and classification techniques for drug response
prediction, we formulated the objective of drug selection and prioritization
as a drug ranking problem. In this work, we proposed multiple pairwise
and listwise neural ranking methods that learn latent representations
of drugs and cell lines and then use those representations to score
drugs in each cell line via a learnable scoring function. Specifically,
we developed neural pairwise and listwise ranking methods, Pair-PushC
and List-One on top of the existing methods, pLETORg and ListNet,
respectively. Additionally, we proposed a novel listwise ranking method,
List-All, that focuses on all the effective drugs instead of the top
effective drug, unlike List-One. We also provide an exhaustive empirical
evaluation with state-of-the-art regression and ranking baselines
on large-scale data sets across multiple experimental settings. Our
results demonstrate that our proposed ranking methods mostly outperform
the best baselines with significant improvements of as much as 25.6%
in terms of selecting truly effective drugs within the top 20 predicted
drugs (i.e., hit@20) across 50% test cell lines. Furthermore, our
analyses suggest that the learned latent spaces from our proposed
methods demonstrate informative clustering structures and capture
relevant underlying biological features. Moreover, our comprehensive
evaluation provides a thorough and objective comparison of the performance
of different methods (including our proposed ones).