Read the following excerpt from a US court opinion:
```
5, 16 (1st Cir.2009) (quoting United States v. Vázquez-Rivera, 407 F.3d 476, 486 (1st Cir.2005)). If, on the contrary, no contemporaneous objection was made, we review under the four-pronged plain-error standard. United States v. Hilario-Hilario, 529 F.3d 65, 74-75 (1st Cir.2008) (citing United States v. Allen, 469 F.3d 11, 16 (1st Cir.2006)). “An unpreserved error is deemed plain (and, therefore, to affect substantial rights) only if the reviewing court finds that it skewed the fundamental fairness or basic integrity of the proceeding below in some major respect.” United States v. Taylor, 54 F.3d 967, 972 (1st Cir.1995) (citing United States v. Griffin, 818 F.2d 97, 100 (1st Cir.1987)); see also United States v. Frady, 456 U.S. 152, 163 n. 14, 102 S.Ct. 1584, 71 L.Ed.2d 816 (1982) . To make this determination, we consider all
```
What is the most suitable continuation to the opinion? Your options are:
A. holding that issues raised for the first time on appeal will not be considered absent exceptional circumstances of plain error or fundamental miscarriage of justice
B. holding that courts of appeal should only correct a forfeited error at the trial level in those circumstances in which a miscarriage of justice would otherwise result
C. holding that the plainerror doctrine applies in those circumstances in which absent appellate intervention a miscarriage of justice would otherwise result
D. holding that failure to consider an improper jury instruction would constitute a miscarriage of justice
E. holding that issues raised for first time on appeal generally will not be considered absent exceptional circumstances of plain error or fundamental miscarriage of justice
Reply with [A, B, C, D, E] only.