With no explanation, chose the best option from "A", "B", "C" or "D". can be demonstrated if the “proof at trial ‘goes beyond the parameters of the indictment in that it establishes offenses different from or in addition to those charged by the grand jury.’ ” United States v. Pigee, 197 F.3d 879, 886 (7th Cir.1999) (quoting United States v. Willoughby, 27 F.3d 263, 266 (7th Cir.1994)) (emphasis added). “As such, we are primarily concerned with changes made to the indictment that affect elements of the crime.” United States v. Mitov, 460 F.3d 901, 906 (7th Cir.2006). The Fifth Amendment is not offended when a difference between the indictment and the proof at trial is insignificant, or a broadly worded indictment provides sufficient room for the evidence presented at trial. See, e.g., United States v. Trennell, 290 F.3d 881, 887-89 (7th Cir.2002) (<HOLDING>). By contrast, reversal is required where,

A: holding that insufficient evidence supported the defendants conviction for possession of cocaine when officers executed a warrant on a small oneroom apartment and found large quantities of crackcocaine in plain view although the defendant supplied police with a false name when they questioned him at the apartment there was no evidence that the defendant had drugs on his person or that he had ever used cocaine
B: holding that an indictment that referred to wholesale quantities of cocaine and cocaine base was sufficiently broad to include the specific quantities of drugs actually found by the jury
C: holding that evidence supported conspiracy with an unnamed drug supplier where inter alia defendant purchased wholesale quantities of drugs from the supplier
D: holding that the term cocaine base in 21 usc  841b1 refers to cocaine in its chemically basic form which includes but is not limited to crack cocaine
B.