Radiomics-Conditioned Modulation of RenalCLIP Features for Clear Cell Renal Cell Carcinoma Classification

Accurate preoperative subtype classification of renal cell carcinoma (RCC) from contrast-enhanced computed tomography remains clinically challenging. Radiomics provides structured tumour descriptors, whereas foundation representations offer transferable image features. However, it remains unclear whether radiomics still adds value beyond pretrained representations, and how 2D and 3D MedVAE encoders compare in this setting. We compared handcrafted radiomics, 2D MedVAE, 3D MedVAE, and their fusion for binary clear-cell RCC versus non-clear-cell RCC classification on KiTS23 under a unified preprocessing pipeline. Concatenation, cross-attention, and gated fusion were evaluated as representative integration strategies, and radiomics feature importance was analysed to support decision-centric interpretability. Fusion consistently improved discrimination over image-only MedVAE branches. The best overall performance was achieved by 3D gated fusion, with an AUC of 82.7%, outperforming the best 2D fusion model (79.6%), the radiomics baseline (74.4%), and the single-modality MedVAE branches. Ablation analysis further showed clear gains of the full fusion model over both image-only and radiomics-only variants, indicating complementary contributions from radiomics and image representations. These findings suggest that radiomics remains relevant for RCC CT classification in the presence of foundation representations, and that its integration with MedVAE is more effective in the 3D setting. More broadly, the study supports a complementary role for radiomics and foundation representations in clinically meaningful imaging decision support.

The rapid proliferation of open-source medical foundation models (FMs) raises a practical question: how well do their pre-trained representations transfer to clinically relevant but data-scarce classification tasks? Particularly in CT-based renal lesion classification, a push toward greater generalizability would be meaningful, as the field is constrained by inherently limited training data. We addressed this through a benchmark of three medical FMs on this specific task. This six-class problem spans common entities like cysts and clear cell renal cell carcinoma, alongside rare subtypes. Using a frozen feature-probing protocol, we compared FM embeddings against a handcrafted radiomics classifier and a 3D ResNet-50 trained from scratch. Models were trained on a composite dataset of 2,854 lesions and evaluated on an external test set of 234 lesions from The Cancer Imaging Archive. Our results reveal two key findings. First, FM performance (AUC 0.70-0.77) matched the from-scratch ResNet (AUC 0.72) while drastically reducing hardware demand, requiring only seconds on a CPU after feature extraction. However, the conventional radiomics baseline significantly outperformed all deep learning approaches, achieving an AUC of 0.88 (all p $\leq$ 0.002). This suggests that current generalist FM embeddings do not yet capture the fine-grained texture and shape heterogeneity driving histological subtype discrimination. Despite their potential in data-scarce settings, medical FMs did not surpass established models for renal lesion stratification, leaving radiomics as the current state-of-the-art.

Radiomics is the established approach for CT-based lung cancer phenotyping, yet comparisons with foundation models rarely isolate contributions of feature extractor, classification head, and segmentation choice, or test cross-cohort robustness. We benchmark five feature extractors (Curia, Curia-2, DINOv3, Radiomics2D, Radiomics3D), seven classification heads (TabPFN, TabICL, XGBoost, CatBoost, Random Forest, logistic regression, Ridge), and three segmentation regimes on five tasks: tumor volume and stage classification, 2-year survival prediction, histology classification, and age prediction. Models are trained on LUNG1 (n=338) and evaluated on an internal test set (n=84) and the external LUNG2 cohort (n=211), with worst-case cross-cohort performance as the primary metric. The dominant design factor is task-dependent: segmentation drives volume and stage classification, while classifier choice drives survival, histology, and age prediction. Radiomics is competitive for tumor volume, tumor stage and survival (partly due to label-derivation effects for the former); Curia variants reach comparable peak scores for survival; DINOv3 falls slightly short across tasks. Patch and slice aggregation have negligible impact. We recommend Curia with tumor segmentation and a CatBoost head as a safe default, achieving the best mean rank across the three primary clinical tasks, though task-specific selection consistently outperforms any cross-task default. When tumor delineations are unavailable, Curia-2 with lung segmentation and logistic regression offers a competitive alternative. All pipelines use a two-stage design suited to small cohort sizes where end-to-end fine-tuning would risk overfitting.