ArticlePloS one2026
RA-PLA: Retrieval-augmented graph convolutional networks for protein-ligand binding affinity prediction.
Article in PloS one, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Protein-ligand binding affinity (PLA) prediction is essential for computational drug discovery, yet existing deep learning methods typically employ a single globally trained model that fails to adapt to individual query samples. In this paper, we propose a novel end-to-end framework that retrieves hard protein-ligand pairs-samples whose nearest neighbors have conflicting labels under manifold smoothness constraints-and integrates them via a semi-supervised graph convolutional network (GCN). For each query, we automatically construct a graph where nodes represent protein-ligand pairs and edges encode pairwise similarities. Our model jointly learns joint descriptors, graph topology, and the GCN predictor. During inference, we fine-tune the model per query using its retrieved hard neighbors.We evaluate on four benchmarks: PDBbind, Davis, KIBA, and BindingDB. Our method consistently outperforms state-of-the-art approaches. On Davis, we achieve a Concordance Index (CI) of 0.952 ± 0.005 (1.6% improvement over NerLTR-DTA) and AUPR of 0.815 ± 0.005 (7.6% improvement). On KIBA, we achieve CI of 0.916 ± 0.002 and AUPR of 0.871 ± 0.005, outperforming DeepCDA by 2.7% and 5.9%, respectively. On PDBbind, our CI of 0.894 ± 0.002 represents an 11.4% improvement over PLA-MoRe. On BindingDB, we achieve AUPR of 0.518 ± 0.009 (5.9% improvement over DeepCDA). In cold-target generalization across four unseen protein families, we achieve average AUPR improvements of 15.5%. Paired t-tests confirm statistical significance (p < 0.05), and ablation studies validate that both hard sample retrieval and end-to-end learning are essential for performance gains. Our framework demonstrates that query-specific adaptation significantly enhances both accuracy and generalization in PLA prediction.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.