Data on epidemiology of cardiomyopathies are limited.1-3 Merlo et al.4 showed a reduction in mortality, heart transplantation, left ventricular (LV) assist device implantation and sudden cardiac death in the last decade, compared with the previous ones, in patients with non-ischaemic dilated cardiomyopathy (DCM). Outcomes were also dependent on specific phenotypes with the poorest in patients with chemotherapy-induced DCM and the best in those with tachycardia-induced DCM. An analysis of the Swedish Heart Failure (HF) Register of the young patients with HF, compared with the others, showed that patients aged <55 years were more likely to have DCM, obesity, congenital heart disease, and a low LV ejection fraction (LVEF). Patients aged <55 years had a five times higher mortality risk compared with control subjects with the highest risk in the youngest ones, 18-34 years old.5 Diabetes is a known risk factor for cardiovascular death in patients with a recent myocardial infarction.6 Shin et al.7 showed the independent prognostic value for HF hospitalizations or cardiovascular death of glycated haemoglobin (A1C) levels (adjusted hazard ratio 1.11, 95% confidence interval 1.01–1.21 per 1% higher A1C) and LVEF in patients with type 2 diabetes and a recent acute coronary syndrome. Cardiac magnetic resonance (CMR) has a major role in the detection and quantification of myocardial fibrosis and adipose tissue, two major determinants of the phenotype and outcomes of patients with HF and preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF).8, 9 Quarta et al.10 review the role of CMR in the management of HFpEF patients. Tayal et al.11 used CMR to evaluate LV reverse remodelling in DCM. Absolute LV contractile reserve by dobutamine stress CMR and female gender predicted LVEF increase over 12 months. Nauta et al.12 retrospectively evaluated the association between LV geometry, clinical and biomarker phenotypes, and therapeutic response in patients with chronic HF. Compared to patients with an eccentric hypertrophy pattern, those with a concentric one had a different clinical and biomarker phenotype and did not benefit from the up-titration of beta-blockers and angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors or angiotensin receptor blockers. Left ventricular ejection time (LVET) was an independent predictor of HF in a community-based cohort studied by echocardiography.13 Patel et al.14 explored its prognostic role in 545 HF outpatients stratified by LVEF. LVET was shorter in HF patients with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) vs. those with HFpEF and its longer duration was independently associated with better 1-year outcomes in HFrEF but not in HFpEF patients. Left atrial (LA) structure and function are major determinants of outcomes in patients with HF and atrial fibrillation.15, 16 LA diameter predicted 4-year mortality also in HF patients with mitral regurgitation treated by percutaneous repair.17 Impaired LA strain may contribute to reduced exercise capacity.18 Sugimoto et al.19 showed that a blunted LA strain is associated with lower stroke volume and cardiac output response to exercise and worse outcomes in HF patients. Pulmonary hypertension and right ventricular dysfunction are major prognostic markers in HF and valve disease.20-23 Santiago-Vacas et al.24 assessed the long-term trajectories of systolic pulmonary artery pressure (SPAP), tricuspid annular plane systolic excursion (TAPSE) and TAPSE/SPAP ratio in 1557 HF patients. These parameters were independent determinants of outcomes and increasing SPAP and declining TAPSE and TAPSE/SPAP ratio in the preceding period were associated with higher mortality. Sodium–glucose co-transporter type 2 inhibitors were found to reduce HF events25, 26 and are studied in major clinical trials in HF patients.27-30 A pre-specified analysis from the Dapagliflozin And Prevention of Adverse-outcomes in HF (DAPA-HF) study showed the lack of interaction between LVEF and the beneficial effect of dapagliflozin on outcomes in HFrEF patients.31 Breast cancer therapies can lead to late-onset HF.32 A pro-inflammatory state, detected by biomarker measurements, can cause cardiac dysfunction even 10 years after treatment in breast cancer survivors.33 Heart rate is a major prognostic marker, especially in patients in sinus rhythm.34, 35 Anker et al.36 identified elevated resting heart rate as associated with increased levels of HF biomarkers and poor outcomes in treatment-naïve cancer patients.