Foundation-model-guided radiogenomic discovery linking cancer genomes to cancer scans

The function of many genes is still unknown, and conventional driver-discovery methods, which rely on how frequently a gene is mutated, cannot assess genes that are only rarely affected. Here we pair Evo~2-based genome analysis with routine clinical imaging to identify gene--phenotype associations at genome-wide scale. For every somatic mutation across three TCGA cohorts (cRCC=clear cell renal cell carcinoma, HCC=hepatocellular carcinoma, and BC=breast cancer; $n = 340$ total), Evo~2 predicts a severity score, with no task-specific training. Per-gene severity summaries are then correlated with radiomic features extracted from paired tumor segmentations, controlling for total mutation burden. In TCGA-cRCC ($n = 162$), this sweep recovers established renal-cancer drivers and identifies 46 additional genes reaching false discovery rate (FDR) significance absent from curated cancer-gene panels, several of which are Mendelian ciliopathy and cytoskeletal-disease genes. These results demonstrate that pairing a genomic language model with widely available clinical imaging can serve as a hypothesis-free discovery tool for gene--imaging associations invisible to conventional approaches.

Bayesian uncertainty estimation improves clinical decision making in medical AI agents

Machine learning models for medical image analysis typically lack a reliable measure of confidence, limiting their use in ambiguous or atypical cases. Here we show that Monte Carlo dropout, applied to a multi-task chest-radiograph classifier (eight thoracic findings, 137,593 training images), provides an epistemic uncertainty signal that tracks generalisation across training-set scales and flags confident yet error-prone predictions. Adding this signal to the point prediction raised error-detection AUROC from 0.74 to 0.77 ($Δ$AUROC +0.023, 95% CI [+0.014, +0.033]). In a controlled 2x2 factorial experiment, a clinical-decision-support agent exploited this uncertainty only when it was delivered as a binary error-risk flag rather than as raw scores, cutting confident misdiagnoses on unreliable findings from 8.5% to 2.7%. Epistemic uncertainty estimation thus carries decision-relevant information beyond point predictions, but its value for downstream agents depends on how it is communicated.

Can Agents Distinguish Visually Hard-to-Separate Diseases in a Zero-Shot Setting? A Pilot Study

The rapid progress of multimodal large language models (MLLMs) has led to increasing interest in agent-based systems. While most prior work in medical imaging concentrates on automating routine clinical workflows, we study an underexplored yet clinically significant setting: distinguishing visually hard-to-separate diseases in a zero-shot setting. We benchmark representative agents on two imaging-only proxy diagnostic tasks, (1) melanoma vs. atypical nevus and (2) pulmonary edema vs. pneumonia, where visual features are highly confounded despite substantial differences in clinical management. We introduce a multi-agent framework based on contrastive adjudication. Experimental results show improved diagnostic performance (an 11-percentage-point gain in accuracy on dermoscopy data) and reduced unsupported claims on qualitative samples, although overall performance remains insufficient for clinical deployment. We acknowledge the inherent uncertainty in human annotations and the absence of clinical context, which further limit the translation to real-world settings. Within this controlled setting, this pilot study provides preliminary insights into zero-shot agent performance in visually confounded scenarios.