  Motivated by the size of cell line drug sensitivity data, researchers have
been developing machine learning (ML) models for predicting drug response to
advance cancer treatment. As drug sensitivity studies continue generating data,
a common question is whether the proposed predictors can further improve the
generalization performance with more training data. We utilize empirical
learning curves for evaluating and comparing the data scaling properties of two
neural networks (NNs) and two gradient boosting decision tree (GBDT) models
trained on four drug screening datasets. The learning curves are accurately
fitted to a power law model, providing a framework for assessing the data
scaling behavior of these predictors. The curves demonstrate that no single
model dominates in terms of prediction performance across all datasets and
training sizes, suggesting that the shape of these curves depends on the unique
model-dataset pair. The multi-input NN (mNN), in which gene expressions and
molecular drug descriptors are input into separate subnetworks, outperforms a
single-input NN (sNN), where the cell and drug features are concatenated for
the input layer. In contrast, a GBDT with hyperparameter tuning exhibits
superior performance as compared with both NNs at the lower range of training
sizes for two of the datasets, whereas the mNN performs better at the higher
range of training sizes. Moreover, the trajectory of the curves suggests that
increasing the sample size is expected to further improve prediction scores of
both NNs. These observations demonstrate the benefit of using learning curves
to evaluate predictors, providing a broader perspective on the overall data
scaling characteristics. The fitted power law curves provide a forward-looking
performance metric and can serve as a co-design tool to guide experimental
biologists and computational scientists in the design of future experiments.
