1. Volume 60, Issue 1, Pages 174-188 (October 2008)
Cortical Thickness Abnormalities in Cocaine Addiction—A Reflection of Both Drug Use and a Pre-existing Disposition to Drug Abuse? 
Nikos Makris, Gregory P. Gasic, David N. Kennedy, Steven M. Hodge, Jonathan R. Kaiser, Myung Joo Lee, Byoung Woo Kim, Anne J. Blood, A. Eden Evins, Larry J. Seidman, Dan V. Iosifescu, Sang Lee, Claudia Baxter, Roy H. Perlis, Jordan W. Smoller, Maurizio Fava, Hans C. Breiter 
Neuron 
Volume 60, Issue 1, Pages (October 2008)
DOI: /j.neuron
Copyright © 2008 Elsevier Inc. Terms and Conditions

2. Figure 1 Results of Cortical Thickness Analysis
Inflated cerebral mantle with (below) and without (above) superimposed parcellation from the MNI 305 average brain. Pseudocolor statistical map overlays (red, p < 0.05; yellow, p < 0.001) illustrate where the cortex of the COC subjects is thinner than in CON subjects. DLPFC, dorsolateral prefrontal cortex; aINS, anterior insula.
Neuron  , DOI: ( /j.neuron )
Copyright © 2008 Elsevier Inc. Terms and Conditions

3. Figure 2
Differences in Cortical Thickness Heterogeneity between Groups
Standard deviation maps across the inflated cortex, showing greater thickness heterogeneity in CON (A) versus COC (B) subjects. Quantitative assessment of the cortical thickness heterogeneity, using a bivariate fit of thickness across vertices (C and D), shows that the quantile density contours are centered on the CON section of the plot for both hemispheres.
Neuron  , DOI: ( /j.neuron )
Copyright © 2008 Elsevier Inc. Terms and Conditions

4. Figure 3 Relative Preference Results from Behavioral Keypressing
Box plots of normalized keypress responses in COC and CON subjects to the BF faces (A), AF faces (B), BM faces (C), and AM faces (D). The width of the green diamond indicates sample size, the horizontal line through the diamond indicates the mean, and the height of the diamond indicates the 95% confidence interval for the mean. The height of the red box indicates the interquartile range (25% and 75% quantiles), the horizontal line through the box indicates the median value, the outermost ends indicate the 10th and the 90th quantiles.
Neuron  , DOI: ( /j.neuron )
Copyright © 2008 Elsevier Inc. Terms and Conditions

5. Figure 4
Correlation Results between Cortical Thickness and Effortful Attention Measures
Correlation plots (CON [dashed lines] and COC [solid lines] subjects) between misses for the effortful divided attention condition (q3Ai task) and average cortical thickness in (i) right RWR, (ii) sets of PUs in RWR but not ATTN, (iii) sets of PUs in RWR and ATTN, and (iv) right posterior INS.
Neuron  , DOI: ( /j.neuron )
Copyright © 2008 Elsevier Inc. Terms and Conditions

6. Figure 5 Cortical Parcellation Units Involved with A Priori Hypotheses
Anatomical PUs in cingulate gyrus (CG; a-e), paracingulate gyrus (PAC; f, g), dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (DLPFC; h, i), insula (INS; j, k), and orbitofrontal cortex (FOC; l-o). (a) subgenual CGa, (b) pregenual CGa, (c) anterior-middle CGa, (d) posterior-middle CGa, (e) posterior cingulate gyrus, (f) pregenual PAC, (g) dorsal PAC, (h) lateral superior frontal gyrus, (i) middle frontal gyrus, (j) anterior insular lobule, (k) posterior insular lobule. (l) lateral FOC, (m) anterior FOC, (n) posterior FOC, (o) medial FOC. (a - c, f - o) were included in RWR. (A) represents a medial sagittal view, (B) represents a lateral sagittal view, and (C) represents an inferior axial view.
Neuron  , DOI: ( /j.neuron )
Copyright © 2008 Elsevier Inc. Terms and Conditions

7. Figure 6 Topological Cortical Parcellation System
(A) shows an intensity-normalized T1-weighted MR coronal image. Segmentation (B) is executed in Cardviews by a semiautomated procedure (Filipek et al., 1994). Outline files created by Cardviews segmentation and parcellation are converted to a FreeSurfer (Fischl and Dale, 2000; Makris et al., 2006b) volume segmentation (C). The surface is tessellated, smoothed (D), and inflated (E) from the converted FreeSurfer volume. An intensity gradient is created throughout the cortex as a function of the distance from the white matter surface (F). The exterior surface is generated to be consistent with the manual segmentation (G). The white matter surface of each subject is transferred to spherical coordinates and registered to the average MNI 305 brain (H). Intersubject averaging and mapping of cortical thickness differences between groups of subjects; pseudocolor statistical maps where red represent p < 0.05 and yellow p < (I). The registration subject (MNI 305) (Caviness et al., 1996; Evans et al., 1993; Makris et al., 2007) was segmented, parcellated, and overlaid on the spherical surface (J) and inflated surface (K). Cortical thickness statistical results are overlain with the parcellation scheme to localize results (L).
Neuron  , DOI: ( /j.neuron )
Copyright © 2008 Elsevier Inc. Terms and Conditions

8. Figure 7 Comparison of Segmentation Methods
Segmentations from the FreeSurfer automated system (B) and the semiautomated Cardviews (TCP) system (A). Slices are from the same individual in their native anatomic space. Brain exterior and gray matter—white matter boundaries are shown in green for Cardviews and in red for the FreeSurfer. Blue boxes are placed where differences are apparent for a priori anatomic regions (e.g., FOC, CGa/PAC, INS, DLPFC). Specifically, where (A) the white matter-gray matter boundary and/or (B) the cortical exterior is observed to extend into the cortical ribbon and exclude a block of tissue from the cortical ribbon. CGa/PAC, anterior cingulate gyrus/paracingulate cortex; DLPFC, dorsolateral prefrontal cortex; FOC, orbitofrontal cortex; INS, insula.
Neuron  , DOI: ( /j.neuron )
Copyright © 2008 Elsevier Inc. Terms and Conditions