Resting-state gradient, echo-planer BOLD fMRI sequences were obtained for the patient 12 days after initial presentation while he was still symptomatic using a General Electric 3T Signa HDx (Waukesha, Wisconsin) scanner at 14.0 level software (8-channel head coil; 30 axial slices; thickness, 5 mm without gap; time to repetition, 2000 milliseconds; echo time, 30 milliseconds; flip angle, 90°; in-plane resolution, 64 × 64; field of view, 220 × 220 mm; 200 volumes), and a spoiled gradient recalled T1-weighted structural image was obtained for coregistration of functional data. Ten cognitively normal volunteers (mean [SD] age, 44.2 [9.16] years; 3 male) were evaluated with the same imaging protocol for comparison. All participants were instructed to rest comfortably in the scanner with their eyes open. The images were preprocessed using statistical parametric mapping (SPM) software (Wellcome Department of Cognitive Neurology, University College London, London, England), with the SPM5 version implemented in MATLAB (Mathworks Inc, Sherborn, Massachusetts). Preprocessing steps included discarding the first 10 volumes to allow for scanner and cognitive equilibrium, rigid body motion correction, slice timing correction, normalization to Montreal Neurologic Institute standard space, coregistration to spoiled gradient recalled T1-weighted structural image, and smoothing with an 8-mm full width at half maximum Gaussian filter. These images were then analyzed using Group ICA of fMRI Toolbox software with individual subject maps produced with the dual-regression method.12 The independent components were visually inspected to identify the DMN based on its typical appearance. The DMN for the subject was then overlaid on the coregistered structural MRI, and the group DMN was overlaid on a representative control subject's coregistered structural MRI. To asses variability in the individual DMN components produced, the average z score from each subject's component were extracted from right and left seed regions using the MarsBar toolbox (http://marsbar.sourceforge.net/). The seed regions of interest were defined using the precuneus and PCC regions from the automated anatomical labeling atlas.13 To quantitatively compare the patient's DMN with the control group’s, the 2-sample t test function in SPM5 was used in a method similar to the commonly used clinical comparison of individual subjects' positron emission tomographic scans to control groups.14 Result are reported as significant if they exceed a voxel-level false discover rate corrected P < .01 with a corrected cluster level P < .001. A similar statistical comparison was performed for multiple other easily identifiable RSN in this data set (ie, right central executive, left central executive, visual, auditory, and sensory-motor networks).