One may argue that pooling data from trials including patients with both early- and late-onset VAP does not make clinical sense. The reason for that is the cause of early-onset VAP, which comprises mostly “community” pathogens, whereas late-onset VAP is caused by more resistant “nosocomial” strains.34,35 Also, late-onset VAP is associated with worse outcomes compared with early-onset VAP.36,37 Actually, in the small French study,23 which includes only patients with early-onset VAP, most patients were infected by “community-acquired pathogens,” such as Streptococcus pneumoniae and methicillin-sensitive Staphylococcus aureus, but very few “nosocomial” pathogens, such as methicillin-resistant S aureus, P aeruginosa, and Acinetobacter baumannii. Moreover, the antibiotic regimens assessed in the study, with the exception of aminoglycosides, include drugs usually used for severe community-acquired pneumonia (amoxicillin-clavulanic acid, ceftriaxone, or cefotaxime). Since most infections in this study resemble severe community-acquired pneumonia more than VAP, it would theoretically favor the absence of difference between treatments, because short therapy has been shown to be suitable for the former condition.8 On the other hand, VAP is increasingly associated with multidrug-resistant pathogens regardless of early or late onset. Prior antibiotic use and previous hospitalization may have a role in this shift.38‐40 Furthermore, given that the comparisons include similar therapeutic schemes for different duration for similar pathogens in each of the compared arms may safely allow the performance of meaningful pooled analyses regardless of VAP onset and type of pathogen resistance. Thus, the extrapolation and applicability of our observations to the total of patients in the ICU with VAP may be facilitated and clinically valid. Additionally, the sensitivity analyses of trials including patients with only late-onset VAP, which we performed to further study the issue under this perspective, yielded similar results. Thus, despite the existing pooling of early-onset with late-onset VAP in the currently available literature, which may be debatable in general, we deemed that some common characteristics between the two types of VAP and the special design of the included trials comparing same regimens with different duration ensured the methodologic validity of our interpretations.