In the current study,7 the authors demonstrate the value added by each different marker, concluding that the integrative analysis of these variables improves prediction of survival. The authors also state that the inclusion of invasive hemodynamic measurements did not significantly improve the prognostic value of the model. This statement, however, should be interpreted with caution. Hemodynamic variables were included in the model as the last step of the stepwise approach for building the model; furthermore, hemodynamic variables may have a high degree of colinearity with many of the variables incorporated in the different models. Therefore, the conclusion about the prognostic value of invasive hemodynamic measurements may be far-reaching. Nevertheless, the CI for the concordance index was not presented in the study,8 limiting further conclusions on the comparison between the models built with different variables (eg, different number of patients and events) most likely related to the given availability of said variables to be analyzed. It would also be useful to determine which specific variable from each class (clinical, functional, laboratory, hemodynamic) of marker was included in the multivariate model to calculate the specific valuation.