IMPORTANCE Data on BNT162b2 messenger RNA (mRNA) vaccine (Pfizer-BioNTech) effectiveness and safety in pregnancy are currently lacking because pregnant women were excluded from the phase 3 trial.OBJECTIVE To assess the association between receipt of BNT162b2 mRNA vaccine and risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection among pregnant women. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTSThis was a retrospective cohort study within the pregnancy registry of a large state-mandated health care organization in Israel. Pregnant women vaccinated with a first dose from December 19, 2020, through February 28, 2021, were 1:1 matched to unvaccinated women by age, gestational age, residential area, population subgroup, parity, and influenza immunization status. Follow-up ended on April 11, 2021.EXPOSURES Exposure was defined by receipt of the BNT162b2 mRNA vaccine. To maintain comparability, nonexposed women who were subsequently vaccinated were censored 10 days after their exposure, along with their matched pair. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURESThe primary outcome was polymerase chain reaction-validated SARS-CoV-2 infection at 28 days or more after the first vaccine dose. RESULTSThe cohort included 7530 vaccinated and 7530 matched unvaccinated women, 46% and 33% in the second and third trimester, respectively, with a mean age of 31.1 years (SD, 4.9 years). The median follow-up for the primary outcome was 37 days (interquartile range, 21-54 days; range, 0-70). There were 118 SARS-CoV-2 infections in the vaccinated group and 202 in the unvaccinated group. Among infected women, 88 of 105 (83.8%) were symptomatic in the vaccinated group vs 149 of 179 (83.2%) in the unvaccinated group (P Ն .99). During 28 to 70 days of follow-up, there were 10 infections in the vaccinated group and 46 in the unvaccinated group. The hazards of infection were 0.33% vs 1.64% in the vaccinated and unvaccinated groups, respectively, representing an absolute difference of 1.31% (95% CI, 0.89%-1.74%), with an adjusted hazard ratio of 0.22 (95% CI, 0.11-0.43). Vaccine-related adverse events were reported by 68 patients; none was severe. The most commonly reported symptoms were headache (n = 10, 0.1%), general weakness (n = 8, 0.1%), nonspecified pain (n = 6, <0.1%), and stomachache (n = 5, <0.1%). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCEIn this retrospective cohort study of pregnant women, BNT162b2 mRNA vaccination compared with no vaccination was associated with a significantly lower risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection. Interpretation of study findings is limited by the observational design.

Background COVID-19 mRNA vaccines were shown to be highly efficacious in preventing the disease in randomized controlled trials; nonetheless, evidence on the real-world effectiveness of this vaccine is limited. Study objective was to evaluate the effectiveness of BNT162b2 vaccine in preventing SARS-CoV-2 infection and COVID-19-related hospitalization and mortality. Methods This historical cohort study included members of a large health provider in Israel that were vaccinated with at least one dose of BNT162b2. The primary outcome was incidence rate of a SARS-CoV-2 infection confirmed with rt-PCR, between 7 to 27 days after second dose (protection-period), as compared to days 1 to 7 after the first dose, where no protection by the vaccine is assumed (reference-period). Results Data of 1,178,597 individuals vaccinated with BNT162b2 were analyzed (mean age 47.7 years [SD=18.1], 48.4% males) of whom 872,454 (74.0%) reached the protection period. Overall, 4514 infections occurred during the reference period compared to 728 during the protection period, yielding a weighted mean daily incidence of 54.8 per 100,000 (95%CI: 26.1-115.0 per 100,000) and 5.4 per 100,000 (95%CI: 3.5-8.4 per 100,000), respectively. The vaccine effectiveness in preventing infection was 90% (95%CI:79%- 95%) and 94% (95%CI:88%-97%) against COVID-19. Among immunosuppressed patients, vaccine effectiveness against infection was 71% (95%CI:37%-87%). The adjusted hazard ratios for hospitalization in those infected were 0.82 (95%CI:0.36-1.88), 0.45 (95%CI:0.23-0.90), and 0.56 (95%CI:0.36-0.89) in the age groups 16-44, 45-64 and 75 and above, respectively. Conclusions The effectiveness of the BNT162b2 vaccine is comparable to the one reported in the phase III clinical trial.

IMPORTANCE Although prior studies have suggested a role of cardiometabolic health on pathogenesis of amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS), the association with diabetes mellitus has not been widely examined. Amyotrophic lateral sclerosis is the most common motor neuron disorder. Several vascular risk factors have been associated with decreased risk for ALS. Although diabetes is also a risk factor for vascular disease, the few studies of diabetes and ALS have been inconsistent.OBJECTIVE To examine the association between diabetes and obesity, each identified through International Statistical Classification of Diseases, Eighth or Tenth Revision codes in a hospital registry, and ALS using data from the Danish National Registers. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTSPopulation-based nested case-control study of 3650 Danish residents diagnosed as having ALS between January 1, 1982, and December 31, 2009, and 365 000 controls (100 for each ALS case) matched on age and sex. The analysis was conducted in September and October 2014. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURESAdjusted odds ratio for ALS associated with diabetes or obesity diagnoses at least 3 years prior to the ALS diagnosis date. RESULTSWhen considering diabetes and our obesity indicator together, the estimated odds ratio for ALS was 0.61 (95% CI, 0.46-0.80) for diabetes and 0.81 (95% CI, 0.57-1.16) for obesity. We observed no effect modification on the association with diabetes by sex. We did find a significant modification by age at ALS diagnosis and age at first mention of diabetes in the hospital registers. The protective association was stronger with increasing age at ALS diagnosis (P = .01), and the odds ratio for first mention of diabetes was 1.66 (95% CI, 0.85-3.21) before age 40 years but 0.52 (95% CI, 0.39-0.70) for older ages. These results are consistent with different associations for type 1 vs type 2 diabetes. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCEIn this Danish nationwide study to investigate the association between diabetes and ALS diagnosis, our findings are in agreement with previous reports of a protective association between vascular risk factors and ALS and suggest that type 2 diabetes, but not type 1, is protective for ALS.