<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<recommendedContent xmlns="http://api.mspoke.com">
    <recommendedItem id="20100101_19_451"
                     title="Sentinel Nodes Predict Spread in Oral Cancer (CME/CE)"
                     score="0.01"
                     href="http://www.medpagetoday.com/HematologyOncology/OtherCancers/tb/18367?impressionId=1265724800431"
                     
      &lt;p&gt;In early oral squamous cell carcinoma, a sentinel node biopsy correctly predicted an absence of lymphatic metastasis in all but 4% of patients, researchers said.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;For T1 and T2 lesions that were clinically node-negative, the procedure  --  combined with additional sectioning and immunohistochemistry  --  yielded a negative predictive value of 96%, according to Francisco Civantos Jr., MD, of the University of Miami, and colleagues.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;For T1 lesions, the value was 100%, while for T2 cancers it was 94%, the researchers reported online in the &lt;em&gt;Journal of Clinical Oncology&lt;/em&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;The finding may position the procedure as an intermediate option between watchful waiting and selective neck dissection, the researchers said, asserting that it&apos;s now &quot;reasonable&quot; to conduct a head-to-head trial of sentinel node biopsy and neck dissection.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;The procedure has significantly increased the sensitivity for detecting lymphatic metastasis in melanoma and breast cancer patients, Civantos and colleagues noted.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;But in oral cancer, many surgeons prefer a completion neck dissection, they added, despite the &quot;measurable morbidity&quot; that&apos;s associated with the procedure. On the other hand, because of that morbidity, other specialists prefer watchful waiting and elective neck irradiation.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;To investigate the issue, Civantos and colleagues conducted a multicenter trial in which patients with early invasive oral cancers were treated with both procedures  --  a sentinel node biopsy, followed by completion selective neck dissection.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;The primary goal was to see if a negative hematoxylin and eosin finding on the sentinel node biopsy accurately predicted the negativity of the other cervical lymph nodes removed in the neck dissection.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;All told, 140 patients qualified and had the dual procedures, the researchers reported.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;The sentinel nodes were identified using a radioactive gamma probe. The primary tumor was removed transorally, followed by the sentinel node biopsy through a small incision within the area of the planned incision for the neck dissection.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Staining of the sentinel nodes at the various trial sites resulted in 106 that were negative. Of those, 100 were also negative by hematoxylin and eosin staining of the neck dissection specimens.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;That yielded a negative predictive value of 94%, the researchers said.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Additional step sectioning and immunohistochemistry at a central pathology lab increased the negative predictive value to 96%, they said.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Both findings were significant, they reported, with a one-sided &lt;em&gt;P&lt;/em&gt;-value of &lt;em&gt;P&lt;/em&gt;&amp;lt;0.0001.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;One limitation of the study, the researchers noted, is that the dual procedures may have interfered with each other, in that sentinel lymph biopsy might have changed the way the neck dissection was performed or the other way around.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;But that &quot;may actually lead to underestimation of the accuracy of this technique,&quot; they said, since the neck dissections were guided by information gleaned from nuclear imaging and the gamma probe used in the sentinel node procedure.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;The study was also limited, the researchers said, because many surgeons involved were only moderately experienced and none was experienced &quot;at levels currently considered appropriate for surgeons caring for breast cancer or melanoma.&quot;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Nonetheless, they said, the negative predictive value found in the study was &quot;higher than anticipated for a multi-institutional setting with relatively inexperienced surgeons.&quot;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;They added that only a clinical trial in which outcomes after a negative sentinel node biopsy are simply observed for several years would yield a true negative predictive value for the procedure.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;div style=&quot;float:left;border-style:solid;border-width:1px;border-color:#8dabbc;font-family:arial;font-size:12px;background-color:#DBE9F2;padding:5px;&quot;&gt;&lt;p&gt;The study was supported by the National Cancer Institute.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Civantos reported no conflicts.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;clear:both;&quot;&gt;&lt;/div&gt;
    </recommendedItem>
    <recommendedItem id="20100101_19_450"
                     title="SSRI and Tamoxifen Increase Mortality Risk (CME/CE)"
                     score="0.01"
                     href="http://www.medpagetoday.com/HematologyOncology/BreastCancer/tb/18376?impressionId=1265724800431"
                     
      &lt;p&gt;Overlapping use of tamoxifen and the antidepressant paroxetine (Paxil) significantly increases the risk of breast cancer mortality, data from a large cohort of breast cancer patients showed.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;The excess breast-cancer mortality risk ranged as high as 91%, depending on the duration of simultaneous use, researchers reported online in &lt;em&gt;BMJ.&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Women taking other antidepressants with tamoxifen, including other selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs), did not have an increased risk of breast cancer death.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&quot;We estimate that use of paroxetine for 41% of tamoxifen treatment (the median overlap in our sample) would result in one additional breast cancer death within five years of cessation of tamoxifen for every 19.7 patients so treated; the risk with more extensive overlap would be greater,&quot; David Juurlink, MD, PhD, of Sunnybrook Health Sciences Center in Toronto, and colleagues concluded.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;The findings add to an accumulation of evidence suggesting that inhibition of the cytochrome P450 2D6 isozyme (CYP2D6) may adversely affect outcomes in breast cancer patients taking tamoxifen. CYP2D6 is the principle catalyst for converting tamoxifen into endoxifen, a metabolite with 100-fold greater affinity for the estrogen receptor.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Multiple studies have shown that women who have a poor-metabolizer phenotype have lower levels of endoxifen, as do women treated with drugs that inhibit CYP2D6.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&quot;Indeed, in patients who receive tamoxifen in addition to a CYP2D6 inhibitor, endoxifen concentrations vary inversely with the degree of CYP2D6 inhibition,&quot; the authors wrote.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Paroxetine is used to treat depression and vasomotor symptoms in breast cancer patients treated with tamoxifen. Paroxetine is not the only SSRI antidepressant used by breast cancer patients, but it is the only SSRI that irreversibly inhibits CYP2D6.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Whether the metabolic effects of CYP2D6 inhibition translated into adverse breast cancer outcomes had not been determined.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;To examine the issue, Juurlink and colleagues compared prescribing data with clinical records of 24,430 breast cancer patients, ages 66 and older, who initiated tamoxifen therapy from 1993 to 2005. Of those, 7,500 also received an antidepressant.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Ultimately, the investigators narrowed the study population to 2,430 women who took a single SSRI during tamoxifen therapy. The most commonly prescribed SSRI was paroxetine (25.9%), followed by sertraline (22.3%), citalopram (19.2%), venlafaxine (15%), fluoxetine (10.4%), and fluvoxamine (7.2%).&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;During a mean follow-up of 2.38 years, 1,074 patients died, including 374 breast cancer deaths.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;The analysis showed an increased risk of breast cancer death only among women taking paroxetine.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;The breast cancer mortality risk increased with the duration of concomitant use of paroxetine and tamoxifen. As the duration of therapeutic overlap increased from 25%, to 50%, to 75% of time on tamoxifen, the excess risk of breast cancer death increased from 24%, to 54%, to 91%.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Investigators repeated the analysis, using death from any cause. Overlapping treatment with tamoxifen and paroxetine led to an increased mortality risk of 13%, 28%, and 46% as the duration of overlap increased from 25% to 75%.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;The results suggest clear implications for use of SSRIs in breast cancer patients on tamoxifen, Frank Andersohn, MD, and Stefan Willich, MD, of Charite University in Berlin, wrote in an accompanying editorial.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&quot;The straightforward answer is to avoid prescribing strong CYP2D6-inhibiting SSRIs (such as paroxetine or fluoxetine) for women with breast cancer who are prescribed tamoxifen, and to consider instead drugs with low potential to inhibit CYP2D6 (such as citalopram or venlafaxine),&quot; they wrote.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;For women who are already taking a potent inhibitor of CYP2D6, doctors should consider switching to a drug that does not inhibit the enzyme, they added. However, any switch should be accomplished gradually, as abrupt discontinuation of an antidepressant confers risk, as well, they noted.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;div style=&quot;float:left;border-style:solid;border-width:1px;border-color:#8dabbc;font-family:arial;font-size:12px;background-color:#DBE9F2;padding:5px;&quot;&gt;&lt;p&gt;Co-author Kathleen Pritchard disclosed relationships with sanofi-aventis, AstraZeneca, Roche, Pfizer, Ortho-Biotech, YM Biosciences, Novartis, Abraxis, Amgen, GlaxoSmithKline, Bristol Myers Squibb, and Roche&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;clear:both;&quot;&gt;&lt;/div&gt;
    </recommendedItem>
    <recommendedItem id="20100101_19_449"
                     title="FDA Okays Statin for Primary Prevention"
                     score="0.01"
                     href="http://www.medpagetoday.com/InfectiousDisease/PublicHealth/tb/18380?impressionId=1265724800431"
                     
      &lt;p&gt;WASHINGTON  --  The FDA has approved rosuvastatin (Crestor) for primary prevention of cardiovascular disease, making it the first statin to receive this indication.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;The new labeling, recommended by an FDA advisory panel late last year, also marks the first time that a drug label will include an indication based on the biomarker highly-sensitive C-reactive protein, an inflammatory marker.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;The new indication would be for men 50 or older and women 60 or older who have fasting LDL of less than 130 mg/dL, a highly-sensitive CRP of 2.0 mg/L or greater, triglycerides of less than 500 mg/dL, and no prior history of heart attack or stroke, or coronary heart disease risk.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;The basis for the new labeling was the JUPITER trial, a randomized, placebo-controlled trial of 17,802 men and women with a mean age of 66 and no history of atherosclerosis. All participants had LDL of less than 130 mg/dL and a highly-sensitive C-reactive protein concentration of 2 mg/L or higher.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Patients were randomized to 20 mg of rosuvastatin for 1.9 years, which reduced median LDL cholesterol to 55 mg/dL, down from a median of 108 mg/dL at baseline. The corresponding relative reduction in the rate of MI, stroke, arterial revascularization, or cardiovascular death was 44% (&lt;em&gt;P&lt;/em&gt;&amp;lt;0.00001).&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;The number needed to treat to avoid one cardiovascular event was 25.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Those results, according to Melvyn Rubenfire, MD, of the University of Michigan, were a &quot;home run for JUPITER,&quot; but it is not clear whether the results would be the same with another statin.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;And there were some risks associated with rosuvastatin, including 13 deaths due to gastrointestinal disorders in the rosuvastatin arm, and 18 patients reported experiencing a &quot;confused state&quot; while taking the drug.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;The most troubling adverse event, however, was an uptick in investigator-reported, new onset diabetes mellitus in the treatment arm, 2.8% versus 2.5%, for a hazard ratio of 1.27 (95% CI 1.05 to 1.53, &lt;em&gt;P&lt;/em&gt;=0.015).&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Rosuvastatin in marketed by AstraZeneca, which also sponsored the JUPITER trial.&lt;/p&gt;
    </recommendedItem>
    <recommendedItem id="20100101_19_448"
                     title="Inflammatory Bowel Disease Linked to Dangerous VT (CME/CE)"
                     score="0.01"
                     href="http://www.medpagetoday.com/Gastroenterology/InflammatoryBowelDisease/tb/18362?impressionId=1265724800431"
                     
      &lt;p&gt;Patients with active inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) could be at far greater risk for potentially deadly blood clots than doctors previously thought, a new British study found.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Nonhospitalized patients with active IBD are 16 times more likely to suffer venous thromboembolism than the general population, with an occurrence rate of 6.4 per 1,000 person-years (HR 15.8, 95% CI 9.8 to 25.5, &lt;em&gt;P&lt;/em&gt;&amp;lt;0.0001), according to an online report in the Feb. 9 issue of &lt;em&gt;The Lancet&lt;/em&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;The authors concluded that such patients could benefit from preventative treatment to prevent blood clotting.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&quot;Despite the low absolute risks during nonhospitalised periods, these results suggest that active inflammatory bowel disease in ambulatory patients might be a far greater risk factor for venous thromboembolism than previously recognised,&quot; Matthew J. Grainge, MD, of the University of Nottingham, and colleagues wrote.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Patients with venous thromboembolism in the leg have a short term-mortality rate of about 6%, increasing as high as 20% when the clot has circulated to the lung.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Researchers believe that infection and inflammation, such as occur in IBD, predispose patients to this life-threatening condition, and those with inflammatory bowel disease seem to be at particular risk.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Grainge and colleagues used records from the U.K. General Practice Research Database from November 1987 through July 2001, to match 13,756 patients with IBD against 71,672 controls without the disease.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Of the subjects, 139 patients and 165 controls developed a blood clot during the study period.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Their results agreed with previous studies indicating that patients hospitalized for IBD are at high risk for venous thromboembolism. However, the new study also found the danger extends to nonhospitalized IBD patients, particularly during a flare-up.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Overall, the researchers reported, patients with IBD had three times as much risk of an embolism as controls (HR 3.4, 95% CI 2.7 to 4.3; &lt;em&gt;P&lt;/em&gt;&amp;lt;0.0001) with an occurrence rate of 2.6 per 1,000 per person-years.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;During a flare-up, IBD patients were at dramatically greater risk.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;The researchers cautioned that the study excluded patients likely to have received corticosteroids for chronic respiratory disease and rheumatoid arthritis, so the results may not reflect blood clotting rates in these populations.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;They also noted that they relied on anonymous patient records and were dependent on family doctors&apos; diagnoses of inflammatory bowel disease, flare-ups and venous thromboembolism.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Despite the limitations of the study, they argued that research into ways to prevent embolism in IBD outpatients is warranted.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&quot;We believe that the medical profession needs to recognise the increased risk in people with inflammatory bowel disease when assessing the likelihood of venous thromboembolism and to address the difficulty of reducing this risk in patients with a flare who are not admitted to hospital,&quot; they wrote.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;They suggested that strategies used to prevent blood clots in hospitalized patients  --  courses of low molecular weight heparin or other newly available anticoagulants  --  might be also be used to prevent clots in nonhospitalized IBD patients experiencing a flare-up.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;In an accompanying editorial, Geoffrey C. Nguyen, MD, and Erik L. Yeo, MD, of the University of Toronto, noted that &quot;the use of steroid prescriptions as a surrogate indicator of acute disease flare restricts the applicability of Grainge and colleagues&apos; findings to flares that are moderate to severe. Whether patients with mild flares are also at increased risk is not clear.&quot;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&quot;Recognition of venous thromboembolism might be increased during periods of frequent contact with doctors, such as during flares compared with during remission of inflammatory bowel disease, thus potentially introducing a bias in ascertainment of venous thromboembolism,&quot; they added.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Nguyen and Yeo also argued that the clinical efficacy and cost-effectiveness of pharmacological prevention in patients with inflammatory bowel disease should be proven before it is routinely recommended during acute flares.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;However, they acknowledged that such evidence could be difficult to acquire, given the low numbers of nonhospitalized IBD patients who suffer venous thromboembolism.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&quot;A pragmatic initial approach to reduction of the rates of morbidity and mortality resulting from venous thromboembolism in ambulatory patients with inflammatory bowel disease would be nonpharmacological thromboprophylaxis, including patients&apos; education and awareness of risk and signs and symptoms of venous thromboembolism, and use of support stockings,&quot; they wrote.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&quot;Physicians should clinically assess for signs and symptoms of this embolism during visits for acute flare of inflammatory bowel disease.&quot;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;div style=&quot;float:left;border-style:solid;border-width:1px;border-color:#8dabbc;font-family:arial;font-size:12px;background-color:#DBE9F2;padding:5px;&quot;&gt;&lt;p&gt;The study was funded by the National Association for Colitis and Crohn&apos;s Disease.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;The authors reported no financial conflicts of interest.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Nguyen reported serving on advisory boards for Schering-Plough, Canada, and Abbott Pharmaceuticals.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Yeo reported receiving an honorarium from sanofi-aventis.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;clear:both;&quot;&gt;&lt;/div&gt;
    </recommendedItem>
    <recommendedItem id="20100101_19_447"
                     title="BLOG: Wearing Many Hats"
                     score="0.01"
                     href="http://www.medpagetoday.com/Blogs/18369?impressionId=1265724800431"
                     
      I was surprised by the outcome of a &lt;a target=&quot;_blank&quot; href=&quot;http://www.medpagetoday.com/Neurology/HeadTrauma/18227&quot;&gt;study&lt;/a&gt; of the benefits of wearing helmets while skiing and snowboarding. A pooled analysis of nine earlier studies found that helmet wearers were 35% less likely to suffer a head injury than those without helmets.&lt;br&gt;
&lt;br&gt;
Only 35%!? From personal experience I would have guessed it to be at least 65% -- or more. In all the wipeouts I&apos;ve had on the slopes, the only time I blacked out and suffered a concussion was when I wasn&apos;t wearing a helmet.&lt;br&gt;
&lt;br&gt;
I&apos;m a wearer of many hats, because I engage in several outdoor activities -- and the 
&lt;b&gt;&lt;a target=&quot;_blank&quot; href=&quot;http://www.theenglishmall.com/images/product/1312/3829f4f43e0d014a8ef3d06a6dd8321f.jpg&quot;&gt;snowboard helmet&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/b&gt; ranks at the top of my protective headgear list. It keeps my head warm, and although I&apos;ve been riding for 15+ years, I still add new scratches to its shell.&lt;br&gt;
&lt;br&gt;
This is a helmet I truly believe in.&lt;br&gt;
&lt;br&gt;
Same goes for my old &lt;b&gt;&lt;a target=&quot;_blank&quot; href=&quot;http://www.hockeydogs.com/ProductImages/helmets/CCM%20H892.jpg&quot;&gt;ice hockey helmet&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/b&gt;, which by league regulation must be worn and surely saved my life on many occasions.&lt;br&gt;
&lt;br&gt;
Next: my &lt;b&gt;&lt;a target=&quot;_blank&quot; href=&quot;http://www.westernsafety.com/msaproducts/msapg48traditionalhelmet.jpg&quot;&gt;firefighting helmet&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/b&gt;. In addition to being required by all sorts of governmental agencies, this one is a must. It&apos;s made of thermoplastic or composite material and shields me from heat, falling and flying debris, and water spray. A fireproof lining adds additional protection to the neck and ears, and it dual-functions as a carrier for door-wedges and flash lights.&lt;br&gt;
&lt;br&gt;
I would expect all of these helmets to decrease my risk of head injury far beyond a mere 35%. I feel this statistic may apply more to helmets for less risky activities.&lt;br&gt;
&lt;br&gt;
My &lt;b&gt;&lt;a target=&quot;_blank&quot; href=&quot;http://www.bigaussiehats.com/images/bell_triton_helmet.jpg&quot;&gt;bike helmet&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/b&gt;, for example. I consider it more of a social hat. Personally I don&apos;t think it&apos;ll really do that much for me if I take a bad spill, but since I have one, I usually do wear it -- if nothing else, it sets a good example for kids. There are times when its use is required to participate in events such as &lt;a target=&quot;_blank&quot; href=&quot;http://www.bikenewyork.org/&quot;&gt;Bike NYC&lt;/a&gt; or to ride trails in state parks such as the &lt;a target=&quot;_blank&quot; href=&quot;http://www.lakeminnewaska.org/state.html&quot;&gt;Minnewaska State Park&lt;/a&gt; in the Catskill Mountains.&lt;br&gt;
&lt;br&gt;
Then there&apos;s the &lt;b&gt;&lt;a target=&quot;_blank&quot; href=&quot;http://www.nevisport.com/images/prod-img/373002_ecrinred_zoom.jpg&quot;&gt;rock climbing helmet&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/b&gt;. I highly doubt it&apos;ll offer much protection in case of a major vertical drop. However I can attest to its &lt;a target=&quot;_blank&quot; href=&quot;http://content.backcountry.com/images/items/medium/PTZ/PTZ0203/EHORG.jpg&quot;&gt;shielding powers&lt;/a&gt; against small rocks or even a stray carabiner that may drop from above, and it does offer protection during contact with the wall during short uncontrolled drops. Chances are you&apos;re climbing in an isolated area that&apos;s hard for rescue crews to reach, so why not throw this one in your backpack before you head out?&lt;br&gt;
&lt;br&gt;
On occasion I also use a &lt;b&gt;&lt;a target=&quot;_blank&quot; href=&quot;http://www.powerkiteshop.com/images/productimages/safety/gathstdhelmet.jpg&quot;&gt;water sport helmet&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/b&gt;. There is some discussion in the windsurf and kitesurf community regarding their usefulness since crashing into water does not produce that hard of an impact. There is however the potential of your board smacking you in the head during a wipe out, or hitting a piece of floating debris, ending up like &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.fksa.org/showpost.php?s=95217d805383fc659a0e1d68f3d5ffc0&amp;p=2264&amp;postcount=2&quot; target=&quot;_blank&quot;&gt;this guy&lt;/a&gt;. When you&apos;re out on the ocean and away from immediate help, wearing one might make the difference between hurting and drowning.&lt;b&gt;&lt;b&gt;&lt;b&gt;&lt;b&gt;&lt;br&gt;
&lt;br&gt;
&lt;br&gt;
&lt;img align=&quot;middle&quot; src=&quot;/images/blogMedia/bjoernkils/Blog_8_GX_web.jpg&quot;&gt;&lt;br&gt;
&lt;/b&gt;&lt;/b&gt;&lt;/b&gt;&lt;/b&gt;
    </recommendedItem>
</recommendedContent>