Search

Introduction: There are limited and conflicting data regarding the impact of hepatitis C in pregnancy on adverse birth outcomes. Methods: Using the Surveillance for Emerging Threats to Pregnant People and Infants Network (SET-NET), a large surveillance cohort, we describe birth outcomes among a cohort of people with HCV in pregnancy in total and by reported substance use. Results: Among 1418 infants, 89% were born to people with reported substance use during pregnancy. The proportion born preterm was 20%, 13% were small-for-gestational age and 34% of term infants required intensive care. Conclusions: Assessments of recent changes to recommendations for HCV screening in pregnancy should evaluate the impact on maternal access to care for both HCV treatment as well as comorbidities such as substance use disorder which may contribute to adverse birth outcomes. Significance: Incidence of hepatitis C in pregnancy is increasing. Prematurity, small-for-gestational age, and intensive care unit admission were common among this surveillance cohort of infants born to people with hepatitis C in pregnancy with high frequency of substance use. Assessments of recent changes to recommendations for HCV screening in pregnancy should evaluate the impact on maternal access to care for both HCV treatment as well as comorbidities such as substance use disorder which may contribute to adverse birth outcomes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

We describe hepatitis C testing of 47 (2%) of 2,266 children diagnosed with perinatal hepatitis C who were exposed during 2018-2020 in 7 jurisdictions in the United States. Expected frequency of perinatal transmission is 5.8%, indicating only one third of the cases in this cohort were reported to public health authorities. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

OBJECTIVE: Although the US infant mortality rate reached a record low in 2020, the sudden infant death syndrome (SIDS) rate increased from 2019. To understand if the increase was related to changing death certification practices or the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, we examined sudden unexpected infant death (SUID) rates as a group, by cause, and by race and ethnicity. METHODS: We estimated SUID rates during 2015 to 2020 using US period-linked birth and death data. SUID included SIDS, unknown cause, and accidental suffocation and strangulation in bed. We examined changes in rates from 2019 to 2020 and assessed linear trends during prepandemic (2015-2019) using weighted least squares regression. We also assessed race and ethnicity trends and quantified COVID-19-related SUID. RESULTS: Although the SIDS rate increased significantly from 2019 to 2020 (P < .001), the overall SUID rate did not (P = .24). The increased SIDS rate followed a declining linear trend in SIDS during 2015 to 2019 (P < .001). Other SUID causes did not change significantly. Our race and ethnicity analysis showed SUID rates increased significantly for non-Hispanic Black infants from 2019 to 2020, widening the disparities between these two groups during 2017 to 2019. In 2020, <10 of the 3328 SUID had a COVID-19 code. CONCLUSIONS: Diagnositic shifting likely explained the increased SIDS rate in 2020. Why the SUID rate increased for non-Hispanic Black infants is unknown, but warrants continued monitoring. Interventions are needed to address persistent racial and ethnic disparities in SUID. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Public health emergencies, from Zika to COVID-19, have underscored the importance of addressing the needs of pregnant people and their infants. Recent events have underlined the critical role of mother–infant-linked longitudinal surveillance to characterize and assess the impacts of emerging, re-emerging, and persistent threats, including infectious diseases, on these populations. In partnership with state, local, and territorial health departments, CDC's National Center on Birth Defects and Developmental Disabilities activated the Surveillance for Emerging Threats to Mothers and Babies Network (SET-NET) to capture information about pregnant people with laboratory-confirmed infection with SARS-CoV-2 (the virus that causes COVID-19) and their infants. SET-NET data were critical in recognizing the severe risks of COVID-19 during pregnancy, which ultimately informed clinical decisions and public health policy, specifically vaccine prioritization at the local, state, and national levels. This commentary describes the activation of SET-NET to monitor COVID-19 in pregnancy and highlights the experiences of health departments. We provide examples of how SET-NET findings informed COVID-19 prevention efforts and public health policy. Lastly, we identify opportunities to improve and advance surveillance efforts to protect the health of pregnant people and their infants in the United States from current and future threats. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Severe coronavirus disease in neonates is rare. We analyzed clinical, laboratory, and autopsy findings from a neonate in the United States who was delivered at 25 weeks of gestation and died 4 days after birth; the mother had asymptomatic severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection and preeclampsia. We observed severe diffuse alveolar damage and localized SARS-CoV-2 by immunohistochemistry, in situ hybridization, and electron microscopy of the lungs of the neonate. We localized SARS-CoV-2 RNA in neonatal heart and liver vascular endothelium by using in situ hybridization and detected SARS-CoV-2 RNA in neonatal and placental tissues by using reverse transcription PCR. Subgenomic reverse transcription PCR suggested viral replication in lung/airway, heart, and liver. These findings indicate that in utero SARS-CoV-2 transmission contributed to this neonatal death. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article presents a study which examined the rates of SARS-CoV-2 infection before and during the period of Omicron variant predominance among infants born to people with infection during pregnancy and whether the period of maternal infection affects infant susceptibility. Topics discussed include background on the evolution of SARS-CoV-2, analysis of the timing of positive tests, and incidence rate of positive SARS-CoV-2 testing among infants born to people with SARS-CoV-2 infection.

Objective: To describe syphilis treatment status and prenatal care among people with syphilis during pregnancy to identify missed opportunities for preventing congenital syphilis., Methods: Six jurisdictions that participated in SET-NET (Surveillance for Emerging Threats to Pregnant People and Infants Network) conducted enhanced surveillance among people with syphilis during pregnancy based on case investigations, medical records, and linkage of laboratory data with vital records. Unadjusted risk ratios (RRs) were used to compare demographic and clinical characteristics by syphilis stage (primary, secondary, or early latent vs late latent or unknown) and treatment status during pregnancy (adequate per the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's "Sexually Transmitted Infections Treatment Guidelines, 2021" vs inadequate or not treated) and by prenatal care (timely: at least 30 days before pregnancy outcome; nontimely: less than 30 days before pregnancy outcome; and no prenatal care)., Results: As of September 15, 2023, of 1,476 people with syphilis during pregnancy, 855 (57.9%) were adequately treated and 621 (42.1%) were inadequately treated or not treated. Eighty-two percent of the cohort received timely prenatal care. Although those with nontimely or no prenatal care were more likely to receive inadequate or no treatment (RR 2.50, 95% CI, 2.17-2.88 and RR 2.73, 95% CI, 2.47-3.02, respectively), 32.1% of those with timely prenatal care were inadequately or not treated. Those with reported substance use or a history of homelessness were nearly twice as likely to receive inadequate or no treatment (RR 2.04, 95% CI, 1.82-2.28 and RR 1.83, 95% CI, 1.58-2.13, respectively)., Conclusion: In this surveillance cohort, people without timely prenatal care had the highest risk for syphilis treatment inadequacy; however, almost a third of people who received timely prenatal care were not adequately treated. These findings underscore gaps in syphilis screening and treatment for pregnant people, especially those experiencing substance use and homelessness, and the need for systems-based interventions, such as treatment outside of traditional prenatal care settings., Competing Interests: Financial Disclosure The authors did not report any potential conflicts of interest., (Copyright © 2024 by the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists. Published by Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved.)

Despite universal prenatal syphilis screening recommendations and availability of effective antibiotic treatment, syphilis prevalence during pregnancy and the incidence of congenital syphilis have continued to increase in the United States (1,2). Concurrent increases in methamphetamine, injection drug, and heroin use have been described in women with syphilis (3). CDC used data on births that occurred during January 1, 2018-December 31, 2021, from two states (Arizona and Georgia) that participate in the Surveillance for Emerging Threats to Pregnant People and Infants Network (SET-NET) to describe the prevalence of substance use among pregnant persons with syphilis by congenital syphilis pregnancy outcome (defined as delivery of a stillborn or live-born infant meeting the surveillance case definition for probable or confirmed congenital syphilis). The prevalence of substance use (e.g., tobacco, alcohol, cannabis, illicit use of opioids, and other illicit, nonprescription substances) in persons with a congenital syphilis pregnancy outcome (48.1%) was nearly double that among those with a noncongenital syphilis pregnancy outcome (24.6%). Persons with a congenital syphilis pregnancy outcome were six times as likely to report illicit use of opioids and four times as likely to report using other illicit, nonprescription substances during pregnancy than were persons with a noncongenital syphilis pregnancy outcome. Approximately one half of persons who used substances during pregnancy and had a congenital syphilis pregnancy outcome had late or no prenatal care. Tailored interventions should address barriers and facilitators to accessing screening and treatment for syphilis among persons who use substances. The need for syphilis screening and treatment should be addressed at any health care encounter during pregnancy, especially among persons who use substances., Competing Interests: All authors have completed and submitted the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors form for disclosure of potential conflicts of interest. Elizabeth Burkhardt reports support from the Georgia Department of Public Health to attend conferences with topics on sexually transmitted diseases, including congenital syphilis. Kathryn Miele reports support from the Infectious Diseases Society for Obstetrics and Gynecology for meeting registration. Dana Meaney-Delman reports annual support from the American Board of Obstetrics and Gynecology to serve as Board Examiner for OBGYN certifying exam. No other potential conflicts of interest were disclosed.

Background: Congenital cytomegalovirus (cCMV) is not a nationally notifiable condition, and little is known about how U.S. health departments (HDs) currently conduct cCMV surveillance., Methods: We surveyed U.S. HDs that conduct cCMV surveillance or screening activities identified through a web-based assessment. Meetings were held with each HD to enhance our understanding of survey responses., Results: Ten states are systematically collecting cCMV case data to track cCMV cases during early infancy and to provide resources and services to families. Cases are ascertained using cCMV diagnostic codes, reported diagnosis, or laboratory results. Data elements collected for each case include demographics (all 10 states), clinical signs (8 states), laboratory data (4 states), treatment (4 states), and long-term outcomes (1 state). Annual number of cases reported by HDs ranged from 3 to 47 cases/year in seven states, which was much lower than the expected number of cCMV cases. All 10 HDs have the ability to analyze data collected and four disseminate findings. Major challenges of surveillance reported by HDs were lack of standardized case definitions, personnel constraints, and limited funding., Conclusions: A comprehensive account of cCMV disease burden is severely limited by low case ascertainment and paucity of data on long-term outcomes. A standardized public health case definition for cCMV would improve consistency in measuring disease prevalence across jurisdictions and over time. Surveillance for cCMV has the potential to increase disease awareness and inform strategies to prevent cCMV-associated disabilities., (© 2022 Wiley Periodicals LLC. This article has been contributed to by U.S. Government employees and their work is in the public domain in the USA.)

Background: Information on the severity of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) attributable to the Delta variant in the United States among pregnant people is limited. We assessed the risk for severe COVID-19 by pregnancy status in the period of Delta variant predominance compared with the pre-Delta period., Methods: Laboratory-confirmed severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infections among symptomatic women of reproductive age (WRA) were assessed. We calculated adjusted risk ratios for severe disease including intensive care unit (ICU) admission, receipt of invasive ventilation or extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO), and death comparing the pre-Delta period (1 January 2020-26 June 2021) and the Delta period (27 June 2021-25 December 2021) for pregnant and nonpregnant WRA., Results: Compared with the pre-Delta period, the risk of ICU admission during the Delta period was 41% higher (adjusted risk ratio [aRR], 1.41 [95% confidence interval {CI}, 1.17-1.69]) for pregnant WRA and 9% higher (aRR, 1.09 [95% CI, 1.00-1.18]) for nonpregnant WRA. The risk of invasive ventilation or ECMO was higher for pregnant (aRR, 1.83 [95% CI, 1.26-2.65]) and nonpregnant (aRR, 1.34 [95% CI, 1.17-1.54]) WRA in the Delta period. During the Delta period, the risk of death was 3.33 (95% CI, 2.48-4.46) times the risk in the pre-Delta period among pregnant WRA and 1.62 (95% CI, 1.49-1.77) among nonpregnant WRA., Conclusions: Compared with the pre-Delta period, pregnant and nonpregnant WRA were at increased risk for severe COVID-19 in the Delta period., Competing Interests: Potential conflicts of interest. The authors: No reported conflicts of interest. All authors have submitted the ICMJE Form for Disclosure of Potential Conflicts of Interest., (Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of Infectious Diseases Society of America 2022.)

Objective: We examined the relationship between trimester of SARS-CoV-2 infection, illness severity, and risk for preterm birth., Study Design: We analyzed data for 6336 pregnant persons with SARS-CoV-2 infection in 2020 in the United States. Risk ratios for preterm birth were calculated for illness severity, trimester of infection, and illness severity stratified by trimester of infection adjusted for age, selected underlying medical conditions, and pregnancy complications., Result: Pregnant persons with critical COVID-19 or asymptomatic infection, compared to mild COVID-19, in the second or third trimester were at increased risk of preterm birth. Pregnant persons with moderate-to-severe COVID-19 did not show increased risk of preterm birth in any trimester., Conclusion: Critical COVID-19 in the second or third trimester was associated with increased risk of preterm birth. This finding can be used to guide prevention strategies, including vaccination, and inform clinical practices for pregnant persons., (© 2022. This is a U.S. Government work and not under copyright protection in the US; foreign copyright protection may apply.)

Importance: Children aged 6 months through 4 years have become eligible for COVID-19 vaccination, but little is known about parental intentions regarding, concerns about, or facilitators to COVID-19 vaccination for this age group., Objectives: To evaluate parental intentions, concerns, and facilitators for COVID-19 vaccination for children aged 6 months through 4 years and to help inform the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices' deliberations and recommendations for COVID-19 vaccination for children aged 6 months through 4 years., Design, Setting, and Participants: This cross-sectional study fielded an online survey from February 2 to 10, 2022, among a nonprobability sample of US parents of children aged 6 months through 4 years who were recruited through Qualtrics using quota-based sampling for respondent gender, race and ethnicity, and child age group., Main Outcomes and Measures: COVID-19 vaccination intentions, time to COVID-19 vaccination, COVID-19 vaccination concerns and facilitators, and trusted COVID-19 vaccination locations for children aged 6 months through 4 years., Results: The final weighted sample of 2031 participants (73.5% participation rate) had more respondents who identified as male (985; weighted percentage, 54.8%) or White (696; weighted percentage, 66.2%), were aged 25 to 49 years (1628; weighted percentage, 85.6%), had at least a bachelor's degree (711; weighted percentage, 40.0%), lived in a metropolitan area (1743; weighted percentage, 82.9%) or the South (961; weighted percentage, 43.4%), or received at least 1 dose of a COVID-19 vaccine (1205; weighted percentage, 59.8%). Half of respondents (645; weighted percentage, 45.6%) indicated that they "definitely" or "probably" will vaccinate their child aged 6 months through 4 years once they became eligible. However, only one-fifth (396; weighted percentage, 19.0%) indicated they would get a COVID-19 vaccine for their child in this age group within 3 months of them becoming eligible for vaccination. Vaccine safety and efficacy were parents' top concerns, and receiving more information about safety and efficacy were the top facilitators to COVID-19 vaccination for this age group. A doctor's office or clinic and local pharmacy were the most trusted COVID-19 vaccination locations for this age group., Conclusions and Relevance: These results suggest that only a minority of parents of children in this age group are eager to vaccinate their children within the first few months of eligibility, with widespread concerns about COVID-19 vaccination for this age group. Thus, considerable efforts to increase parental COVID-19 vaccine confidence for children aged 6 months through 4 years may be needed to maximize COVID-19 vaccination for this age group in the United States.

On June 17, 2022, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) issued Emergency Use Authorization (EUA) amendments for the mRNA-1273 (Moderna) COVID-19 vaccine for use in children aged 6 months-5 years, administered as 2 doses (25 µg [0.25 mL] each), 4 weeks apart, and BNT162b2 (Pfizer-BioNTech) COVID-19 vaccine for use in children aged 6 months-4 years, administered as 3 doses (3 µg [0.2 mL] each), at intervals of 3 weeks between doses 1 and 2 and ≥8 weeks between doses 2 and 3. On June 18, 2022, the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) issued separate interim recommendations for use of the Moderna COVID-19 vaccine in children aged 6 months-5 years and the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine in children aged 6 months-4 years for the prevention of COVID-19.* Both the Moderna and Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccines met the criteria for immunobridging, which is the comparison of neutralizing antibody levels postvaccination in young children with those in young adults in whom efficacy had been demonstrated. Descriptive efficacy analyses were also conducted for both Moderna and Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccines during the period when the Omicron variant of SARS-CoV-2 (the virus that causes COVID-19) predominated. No specific safety concerns were identified among recipients of either vaccine. ACIP recommendations for the use of the Moderna COVID-19 vaccine and the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine in children aged 6 months-5 years and 6 months-4 years, respectively, are interim and will be updated as additional information becomes available. Vaccination is important for protecting children aged 6 months-5 years against COVID-19., Competing Interests: All authors have completed and submitted the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors form for disclosure of potential conflicts of interest. No potential conflicts of interest were disclosed.

The Surveillance for Emerging Threats to Mothers and Babies Network conducts longitudinal surveillance of pregnant persons in the United States with laboratory-confirmed severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 infection during pregnancy. Of 6,551 infected pregnant persons in this analysis, 142 (2.2%) had positive RNA tests >90 days and up to 416 days after infection.

Zika virus infection during pregnancy can cause serious birth defects of the brain and eyes, including intracranial calcifications, cerebral or cortical atrophy, chorioretinal abnormalities, and optic nerve abnormalities (1,2). The frequency of these Zika-associated brain and eye defects, based on data from the U.S. Zika Pregnancy and Infant Registry (USZPIR), has been previously reported in aggregate (3,4). This report describes the frequency of individual Zika-associated brain and eye defects among infants from pregnancies with laboratory evidence of confirmed or possible Zika virus infection. Among 6,799 live-born infants in USZPIR born during December 1, 2015-March 31, 2018, 4.6% had any Zika-associated birth defect; in a subgroup of pregnancies with a positive nucleic acid amplification test (NAAT) for Zika virus infection, the percentage was 6.1% of live-born infants. The brain and eye defects most frequently reported included microcephaly, corpus callosum abnormalities, intracranial calcification, abnormal cortical gyral patterns, ventriculomegaly, cerebral or cortical atrophy, chorioretinal abnormalities, and optic nerve abnormalities. Among infants with any Zika-associated birth defect, one third had more than one defect reported. Certain brain and eye defects in an infant might prompt suspicion of prenatal Zika virus infection. These findings can help target surveillance efforts to the most common brain and eye defects associated with Zika virus infection during pregnancy should a Zika virus outbreak reemerge, and might provide a signal to the reemergence of Zika virus, particularly in geographic regions without ongoing comprehensive Zika virus surveillance., Competing Interests: All authors have completed and submitted the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors form for disclosure of potential conflicts of interest. Amanda Elmore reports support from the Florida Birth Defects Registry, Surveillance, Intervention, and Referral to Services for Infants with Microcephaly or Other Adverse Outcomes linked with the Zika Virus in Florida. Jane Fornoff reports that she is vice-chair of the Illinois Department of Public Health’s Institutional Review Board. Nicole D. Longcore reports grant support from Epidemiology and Laboratory Capacity for Infectious Diseases. Amy E. Nance reports that the is co-chair for Communication and Health Promotion of the National Birth Defect Prevention Network. Brennan Martin reports being a member-at-large for the National Birth Defect Prevention Network (2019). No other potential conflicts of interest were disclosed.

The Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 (BNT162b2) vaccine is a lipid nanoparticle-formulated, nucleoside-modified mRNA vaccine encoding the prefusion spike glycoprotein of SARS-CoV-2, the virus that causes COVID-19. On August 23, 2021, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approved a Biologics License Application (BLA) for use of the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine, marketed as Comirnaty (Pfizer, Inc.), in persons aged ≥16 years (1). The Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine is also recommended for adolescents aged 12-15 years under an Emergency Use Authorization (EUA) (1). All persons aged ≥12 years are recommended to receive 2 doses (30 μg, 0.3 mL each), administered 3 weeks apart (2,3). As of November 2, 2021, approximately 248 million doses of the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine had been administered to persons aged ≥12 years in the United States.* On October 29, 2021, FDA issued an EUA amendment for a new formulation of Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine for use in children aged 5-11 years, administered as 2 doses (10 μg, 0.2 mL each), 3 weeks apart (Table) (1). On November 2, 2021, the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) issued an interim recommendation † for use of the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine in children aged 5-11 years for the prevention of COVID-19. To guide its deliberations regarding recommendations for the vaccine, ACIP used the Evidence to Recommendation (EtR) Framework § and incorporated a Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach. ¶ The ACIP recommendation for the use of the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine in children aged 5-11 years under an EUA is interim and will be updated as additional information becomes available. The Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine has high efficacy (>90%) against COVID-19 in children aged 5-11 years, and ACIP determined benefits outweigh risks for vaccination. Vaccination is important to protect children against COVID-19 and reduce community transmission of SARS-CoV-2., Competing Interests: All authors have completed and submitted the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors form for disclosure of potential conflicts of interest. H. Keipp Talbot reports institutional grants from the National Institutes of Health. No other potential conflicts of interest were disclosed.

On May 10, 2021, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) expanded its Emergency Use Authorization for the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine to include adolescents aged 12-15 years; this authorization was followed by interim recommendations from the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) for the vaccine among this age group (1). Using data from nonprobability-based Internet panel surveys administered by the Healthcare and Public Perceptions of Immunizations (HaPPI) Survey Collaborative, the acceptability of adolescent COVID-19 vaccination and self-reported factors increasing vaccination intent were assessed among independently recruited samples of 985 adolescents aged 13-17 years and 1,022 parents and guardians (parents) of adolescents aged 12-17 years during April 15-April 23, 2021, prior to vaccine authorization for this age group. Approximately one quarter (27.6%) of parents whose adolescents were already vaccine-eligible (i.e., aged 16-17 years) reported their adolescent had received ≥1 COVID-19 vaccine dose, similar to the proportion reported by vaccine-eligible adolescents aged 16-17 years (26.1%). However, vaccine receipt reported by parents of adolescents differed across demographic groups; parents identifying as female or Hispanic, or who had an education lower than a bachelor's degree reported the lowest adolescent COVID-19 vaccination receipt. Among parents of unvaccinated adolescents aged 12-17 years, 55.5% reported they would "definitely" or "probably" have their adolescent receive a COVID-19 vaccination. Among unvaccinated adolescents aged 13-17 years, 51.7% reported they would "definitely" or "probably" receive a COVID-19 vaccination. Obtaining more information about adolescent COVID-19 vaccine safety and efficacy, as well as school COVID-19 vaccination requirements, were the most commonly reported factors that would increase vaccination intentions among both parents and adolescents. Federal, state, and local health officials and primary care professionals were the most trusted sources of COVID-19 vaccine information among both groups. Efforts focusing on clearly communicating to the public the benefits and safety of COVID-19 vaccination for adolescents, particularly by health care professionals, could help increase confidence in adolescent COVID-19 vaccine and vaccination coverage., Competing Interests: All authors have completed and submitted the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors form for disclosure of potential conflicts of interest. Aaron M. Scherer reports grants from the National Institutes of Health and the Veterans Administration, outside the submitted work. Andrew M. Parker reports grants from the National Science Foundation and the National Institutes of Health, outside the submitted work. No other potential conflicts of interest were disclosed.

The Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 (BNT162b2) vaccine is a lipid nanoparticle-formulated, nucleoside-modified mRNA vaccine encoding the prefusion spike glycoprotein of SARS-CoV-2, the virus that causes COVID-19. Vaccination with the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine consists of 2 intramuscular doses (30 μg, 0.3 mL each) administered 3 weeks apart. On December 11, 2020, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) issued an Emergency Use Authorization (EUA) for use of the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine (Pfizer, Inc; Philadelphia, Pennsylvania) in persons aged ≥16 years (1); on December 12, 2020, the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) issued an interim recommendation for use of the vaccine in the same age group (2). As of May 12, 2021, approximately 141.6 million doses of the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine had been administered to persons aged ≥16 years.* On May 10, 2021, FDA expanded the EUA for the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine to include adolescents aged 12-15 years (1). On May 12, 2021, ACIP issued an interim recommendation † for use of the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine in adolescents aged 12-15 years for the prevention of COVID-19. To guide its deliberations regarding the vaccine, ACIP used the Evidence to Recommendation (EtR) Framework, § using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach. ¶ The ACIP recommendation for the use of the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine in persons aged ≥12 years under an EUA is interim and will be updated as additional information becomes available., Competing Interests: All authors have completed and submitted the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors form for disclosure of potential conflicts of interest. No potential conflicts of interest were disclosed.

Pregnant women with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) are at increased risk for severe illness and might be at risk for preterm birth (1-3). The full impact of infection with SARS-CoV-2, the virus that causes COVID-19, in pregnancy is unknown. Public health jurisdictions report information, including pregnancy status, on confirmed and probable COVID-19 cases to CDC through the National Notifiable Diseases Surveillance System.* Through the Surveillance for Emerging Threats to Mothers and Babies Network (SET-NET), 16 jurisdictions collected supplementary information on pregnancy and infant outcomes among 5,252 women with laboratory-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection reported during March 29-October 14, 2020. Among 3,912 live births with known gestational age, 12.9% were preterm (<37 weeks), higher than the reported 10.2% among the general U.S. population in 2019 (4). Among 610 infants (21.3%) with reported SARS-CoV-2 test results, perinatal infection was infrequent (2.6%) and occurred primarily among infants whose mother had SARS-CoV-2 infection identified within 1 week of delivery. Because the majority of pregnant women with COVID-19 reported thus far experienced infection in the third trimester, ongoing surveillance is needed to assess effects of infections in early pregnancy, as well the longer-term outcomes of exposed infants. These findings can inform neonatal testing recommendations, clinical practice, and public health action and can be used by health care providers to counsel pregnant women on the risks of SARS-CoV-2 infection, including preterm births. Pregnant women and their household members should follow recommended infection prevention measures, including wearing a mask, social distancing, and frequent handwashing when going out or interacting with others or if there is a person within the household who has had exposure to COVID-19. † ., Competing Interests: All authors have completed and submitted the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors form for disclosure of potential conflicts of interest. No potential conflicts of interest were disclosed.

Studies suggest that pregnant women might be at increased risk for severe illness associated with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) (1,2). This report provides updated information about symptomatic women of reproductive age (15-44 years) with laboratory-confirmed infection with SARS-CoV-2, the virus that causes COVID-19. During January 22-October 3, CDC received reports through national COVID-19 case surveillance or through the National Notifiable Diseases Surveillance System (NNDSS) of 1,300,938 women aged 15-44 years with laboratory results indicative of acute infection with SARS-CoV-2. Data on pregnancy status were available for 461,825 (35.5%) women with laboratory-confirmed infection, 409,462 (88.7%) of whom were symptomatic. Among symptomatic women, 23,434 (5.7%) were reported to be pregnant. After adjusting for age, race/ethnicity, and underlying medical conditions, pregnant women were significantly more likely than were nonpregnant women to be admitted to an intensive care unit (ICU) (10.5 versus 3.9 per 1,000 cases; adjusted risk ratio [aRR] = 3.0; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 2.6-3.4), receive invasive ventilation (2.9 versus 1.1 per 1,000 cases; aRR = 2.9; 95% CI = 2.2-3.8), receive extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) (0.7 versus 0.3 per 1,000 cases; aRR = 2.4; 95% CI = 1.5-4.0), and die (1.5 versus 1.2 per 1,000 cases; aRR = 1.7; 95% CI = 1.2-2.4). Stratifying these analyses by age and race/ethnicity highlighted disparities in risk by subgroup. Although the absolute risks for severe outcomes for women were low, pregnant women were at increased risk for severe COVID-19-associated illness. To reduce the risk for severe illness and death from COVID-19, pregnant women should be counseled about the importance of seeking prompt medical care if they have symptoms and measures to prevent SARS-CoV-2 infection should be strongly emphasized for pregnant women and their families during all medical encounters, including prenatal care visits. Understanding COVID-19-associated risks among pregnant women is important for prevention counseling and clinical care and treatment., Competing Interests: All authors have completed and submitted the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors form for disclosure of potential conflicts of interest. No potential conflicts of interest were disclosed.