Multimodal Prediction of Renal Tumor Malignancy From Radiology Reports and Structured Electronic Health Records: Retrospective Cohort Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND Accurate preoperative prediction of renal tumor malignancy is critical for guiding decisions and reducing overtreatment, as a substantial proportion of renal masses prove benign. Although radiology assessments and structured electronic health record (EHR) data are routinely used, many tumor-specific descriptors remain embedded in free-text radiology reports and are underused due to extraction challenges. OBJECTIVE This study aimed to develop and evaluate a multimodal pipeline that integrates structured EHR variables with natural language processing features from computed tomography (CT) radiology reports, including large language model (LLM)–extracted abnormality characteristics and transformer-based report embeddings, to improve malignancy prediction. METHODS We conducted a retrospective cohort study using University of Florida Health Integrated Data Repository Observational Medical Outcomes Partnership–mapped EHR data from December 2011 to August 2024. Adults with renal tumors were included if they had longitudinal diagnostic documentation consistent with a renal mass and at least 1 preoperative renal CT report; final benign or malignant status served as the outcome. Structured features included demographics, comorbidities, medications, vital signs, and laboratory measurements. From the recent preindex CT report, an on-premises LLM isolated kidney-specific findings and extracted abnormality characteristics. Four locally deployed LLMs were evaluated against manual annotations of 500 reports. Kidney-specific text was encoded using pretrained biomedical transformer models, including radiology Bidirectional Encoder Representations from Transformers (BERT) variants. We evaluated unimodal baselines and multimodal early, middle, and late fusion strategies. Model development used 5-fold cross-validation within the 80% training partition; each fold-specific model was evaluated on the same independent 20% held-out test set, with performance reported as mean and SD across the 5 held-out test evaluations. The primary metric was area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC). RESULTS The final cohort included 967 patients (n=712, 73.6% malignant). In extraction evaluation, Qwen2.5-32B achieved 88.3% overall accuracy with a 100% extraction success rate and was selected for downstream feature generation. Among unimodal models, the structured clinical variable model achieved an AUC of 0.758 (SD 0.012), kidney-specific text with radiology BERT achieved an AUC of 0.746 (SD 0.058), and abnormality characteristics alone achieved an AUC of 0.716 (SD 0.015). Multimodal fusion models achieved higher descriptive performance than unimodal models. Early fusion achieved the highest AUC (mean 0.813, SD 0.008), and F1-score (mean 0.809, SD 0.030), while late fusion achieved an AUC of 0.805 (SD 0.016). Ablation and interpretability analyses suggested complementary predictive information from structured clinical variables and kidney-specific text embeddings. CONCLUSIONS Integrating unstructured radiology report text with structured EHR variables achieved higher mean predictive performance than unimodal approaches in descriptive comparisons. Multimodal fusion, particularly early fusion incorporating radiology BERT–derived kidney-specific text embeddings, achieved the strongest discrimination, suggesting potential value of natural language processing–enabled multimodal EHR pipelines for informing preoperative risk stratification.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.011 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".