• Login
    • Join
  • FOLLOW:
  • Subscribe Free
    • Magazine
    • eNewsletter
    Checkout
    • Magazine
    • News
    • Manufacturing
    • Packaging
    • Development
    • Compliance
    • Top 25
    • Directory
    • Microsites
    • Events
    • More
  • Magazine
  • News
  • Manufacturing
  • Packaging
  • Development
  • Compliance
  • Top 25
  • Directory
  • Microsites
  • Events
  • Current / Back Issue
    Features
    Editorial
    Columns
    Digital Edition
    eNewsletter Archive
    Our Team
    Editorial Guidelines
    Subscribe Now
    Advertise Now
    Top Features
    Pharmaceutical Packaging Technology

    Elemental Impurities: The Time Has Come

    Continuous vs. Batch Production

    2018: The evolution of pharmaceutical packaging

    Formulation Development Trends
    Breaking News
    Online Exclusives
    Industry News
    Collaborations & Alliances
    Promotions & Moves
    Trials & Filings
    Financial Reports
    Bio News & Views
    Custom Sourcing News
    Packaging & Tracking
    CRO News
    Live From Shows
    Top News
    InClinica Names BD Manager

    SCHOTT Introduces syriQ BioPure

    Heritage Pharma Makes Leadership Changes

    JLL and Water Street Acquire Triplefin

    WuXi AppTec Opens Laboratory Testing Facility in NJ
    APIs
    Aseptic Processing
    Cleaning Validation
    Clinical Trial Materials
    Cytotoxics and High Potency Manufacturing
    Equipment
    Excipients
    Extractables and Leachables
    Facilities
    Fill/Finish
    Lyophilization
    Parenterals
    Process Development
    Process Validation
    Risk Management
    Scale-up/ Technology Transfer
    Solid Dosage/ Creams/ Ointments

    WuXi AppTec Opens Laboratory Testing Facility in NJ

    Arcinova Receives £1.5M Innovate UK Grant

    Vetter Welcomes Illinois Governor

    Sterling Pharma Invests £6M To Expand Offerings

    PhoenixMD, STA Enter Manufacturing Agreement
    Capsules
    Cold Chain Management
    Injectables
    Logistics
    Serialization
    Solid Dosage / Semi-solids
    Supply Chain
    Vials

    INTERPHEX: Adents Showcases Cloud-Based Serialization Solution

    Almac Group Expands Packaging Capabilities

    Catalent Bolsters Clinical Supply Capabilities

    West, Stevanato Group Enter Ompi EZ-fill Alliance

    Pharmaceutical Packaging Technology
    Analytical Services
    Bioanalytical Services
    Bioassay Developement
    Biologics, Proteins, Vaccines
    Biosimilars
    Chemistry
    Clinical Trials
    Drug Delivery
    Drug Development
    Drug Discovery
    Formulation Development
    Information Technology
    Laboratory Testing
    Methods Development
    Microbiology
    Preclinical Outsourcing
    R&D
    Toxicology

    WuXi AppTec Opens Laboratory Testing Facility in NJ

    ICON, Intel Enter Pharma Analytics Platform Pact

    AMRI Renews NIH Contract

    Sterling Pharma Invests £6M To Expand Offerings

    PhoenixMD, STA Enter Manufacturing Agreement
    Filtration & Purification
    GMPs/GCPs
    Inspections
    QA/QC
    Regulatory Affairs
    Validation

    Blockchain: The Next Big Trend in BioPharma?

    Emergent Completes Market Authorization

    Technical and Regulatory Considerations for Pharmaceutical Product Lifecycle: ICH Q12

    LSNE Expands Capabilities and QC Laboratory Space

    Evotec Launches Drug Development Service
    Companies
    Categories
    Corporate Capabilities
    Add New Company
    Contract Service Directory Companies
    Adaptive Clinical Systems

    Piramal Pharma Solutions

    Alcami

    iuvo BioScience

    Fusion Scientific Laboratories
    Companies
    News Releases
    Posters
    Brochures
    Services
    Videos
    Case Study
    White Papers
    Jobs
    Contract Service Directory Companies
    Alcami
    Webinars
    Live From Shows
    • Magazine
      • Current / Back Issue
      • Features
      • Editorial
      • Columns
      • Editorial Guidelines
      • Subscribe Now
      • Advertise Now
      • Enewsletter Archive
      • Digital Edition
    • Directory
      • Companies
      • Categories
      • Corporate Capabilities
      • Add Your Company
    • Manufacturing
      • APIs
      • Aseptic Processing
      • Cleaning Validation
      • Clinical Trial Materials
      • Cytotoxics and High Potency Manufacturing
      • Equipment
      • Excipients
      • Extractables and Leachables
      • Facilities
      • Fill/Finish
      • Lyophilization
      • Parenterals
      • Process Development
      • Process Validation
      • Risk Management
      • Scale-up/ Technology Transfer
      • Solid Dosage/ Creams/ Ointments
      • cGMP Manufacture
    • Packaging
      • Capsules
      • Cold Chain Management
      • Injectables
      • Logistics
      • Serialization
      • Solid Dosage / Semi-solids
      • Supply Chain
      • Vials
    • Development
      • Analytical Services
      • Bioanalytical Services
      • Bioassay Developement
      • Biologics, Proteins, Vaccines
      • Biosimilars
      • Chemistry
      • Clinical Trials
      • Drug Delivery
      • Drug Development
      • Drug Discovery
      • Formulation Development
      • Information Technology
      • Laboratory Testing
      • Methods Development
      • Microbiology
      • Preclinical Outsourcing
      • R&D
      • Toxicology
    • Compliance
      • Filtration & Purification
      • GMPs/GCPs
      • Inspections
      • QA/QC
      • Regulatory Affairs
      • Validation
    • Top 25 Pharma & BioPharma
      • Top 20 Pharma & BioPharma
      • Top 10 BioPharma Companies
    • Breaking News
    • Online Exclusives
    • Slideshows
    • Experts Opinions
    • Surveys
      • Outsourcing Survey
      • Salary Survey
    • Glossary
    • Videos
    • White Papers
    • Infographics
    • Supplier Microsite
      • Companies
      • News Releases
      • Posters
      • Brochures
      • Services
      • Videos
      • Case Study
      • White Papers
    • Contract Pharma Conference
      • Contract Pharma Conference
      • Speakers
      • Exhibitors
      • Agenda
      • Conference Sessions
    • Events
      • Industry Events
      • Live from Show Events
      • Webinars
    • Classifieds / Job Bank
      • Classifieds
      • Job Bank
    • About Us
      • About Us
      • Contact Us
      • Advertise With Us
      • Privacy Policy
      • Terms of Use
    Features

    Bringing Transparency and Collaboration to CRO Oversight

    Relationships between sponsors and CROs are getting stronger

    Related CONTENT
    • Using Technology to Improve Study Startup
    • Optimizing Clinical Ops: What’s holding up IT advances?
    • Brazilian Pharmaceutical Market Poised for Growth
    • Pivot Acquires IndUS
    • CRO-Sponsor Partnerships
    Craig Morgan , goBalto Inc. 11.17.15
    The connection between sponsors and contract research organizations (CROs) is strengthening as outsourcing continues to be a clinical trial mainstay. Making the relationship between the sponsor and the CRO as productive as possible means acknowledging the ongoing transition away from tactical projects and toward strategic partnerships, with both stakeholders having a vested interest. This transition is taking many forms,  but generally involves complexities, such as shared decision making, delivery of broad cross-study solutions, performance assessments, and shared risk and reward structures. At the core is a desire to build a collaborative long lasting partnership, which requires open and transparent communications, fostering a foundation of trust and commitment.

    Research suggests that building relationships to improve clinical trial operations requires embracing centralized monitoring and study quality metrics as standard practice, and more recently, CRO oversight.  Together, they form a solid basis for continuous quality management, but of these elements, CRO oversight has been gaining particular attention as sponsors sharpen their focus on how a clinical trial is progressing. One of the areas in need of greater CRO oversight is study startup (SSU), a perpetual bottleneck that continues to be handled largely by spreadsheets, shared file drives, and unsecured email, making data gathering and the timely sharing of data difficult in today’s global market. As evidence that more SSU oversight is needed, it can take an estimated eight months to move from pre-visit through site initiation.  For sponsors, improving oversight of this function means real-time visibility into study startup progress, affording greater confidence in the reports they receive from the CROs involved.

    Because sponsors often have multiple studies running concurrently with multiple CROs, oversight is complicated, as each CRO has its own method for SSU and for transmitting information back to the sponsor. This can result in inconsistent and outdated data, making it difficult to benchmark the status of the various studies in the portfolio based on the performance of each CRO per therapeutic area and geographic area. By transitioning to a solution used by all CROs across the portfolio, oversight improves, and sponsors can build reliable institutional knowledge about CRO performance.

    This article defines CRO oversight, describes the importance of relationship building, and takes a look at innovative solutions for streamlining SSU across CROs, a critical step toward reviewing study status in real-time.

    What is CRO Oversight? 
    As sponsors turn their attention to their core competencies, and continue to outsource, it is hardly surprising that stakeholders need a pathway to quality achievement as they build strategic relationships. Simply handing off multi-million dollar studies to CROs without carefully crafted plans for communications and reporting operational data as the study unfolds is hardly a wise move, yet what kind of oversight is needed, and how much is too much?

    These are questions worth considering as reliance on CROs is on the upswing. A 2015 CRO outsourcing survey of 375 industry professionals showed that most respondents, 80%, anticipate growing demand for CRO services this year, particularly strategic services (60%) rather than tactical (40%).  In addition, there is an expected 7.4% compound annual growth rate for the CRO market through 2019,  and market penetration may reach a hefty 72% by the end of the decade 2020.  This trend is rooted in intense competition to improve productivity, driving sponsors to contain operational and infrastructure costs while completing projects better, faster and more efficiently. 

    The issue of CRO oversight by sponsors is raised in the 2013 guidance put forth by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) on risk-based monitoring.  According to the guidance, if a sponsor delegates monitoring responsibility to a CRO, FDA regulations require the CRO to comply with them. Also, the sponsor retains responsibility for oversight of the work completed by the CRO(s) they select. The guidance spells out oversight as the sponsor’s periodic review of monitoring reports and performance or quality metrics, as well as documented communication between the sponsor and CRO regarding monitoring progress. Importantly, both parties are to establish processes to exchange this relevant information. 

    Aligning with this guidance, sponsors see the size, scope, and complexity of clinical trials and their associated costs as justification for a degree of oversight that is well defined, transparent, and includes real-time reporting of study status and milestones. This approach addresses the problems inherent in gathering information from multiple CRO systems, causing lack of transparency, hard to see performance trends in SSU and other issues resulting from data compiled differently in each system. SSU oversight is complicated further by the fact that SSU is a process with numerous steps, namely country selection, pre-study visits, site selection and initiation, regulatory document submission, budget and contract negotiations, patient recruitment initiatives, and enrolling the first patient.  

    Considering that sponsors often work with several CROs, the challenge for overseeing these tasks is to find the right balance, rather than taking a heavy-handed approach whereby CROs feel they are being micromanaged. The goal is for the sponsor and CRO to operate as a team with shared risk, and agreed upon structures and processes. This is known as a centralized governance model, and entails gathering input from CROs so they are onboard with sponsor oversight, including the training needed for stakeholders to achieve the desired level of quality performance. Research indicates that sponsors and CROs want a clear understanding of expectations at the beginning of a relationship, and as they put together the centralized governance model, issues such as trust, commitment on both sides, good communication, openness and transparency and upfront planning need to be clearly defined.   
     
    The importance of building a good relationship between sponsors and CROs is featured in a 2014 survey of 127 sponsors and 105 providers (mostly CROs), conducted by The Avoca Group.  The survey focused on the extent to which sponsors and providers, including CROs, are adopting intelligent, data-driven approaches to clinical trial execution. According to the survey, sponsors tended to be far more dissatisfied with the quality of work provided by CROs as compared to how CROs perceived their own work, but fortunately, there was an improvement in 2014 versus 2013. Specifically, sponsors (n = 88) reported being satisfied or very satisfied 59% of the time in 2014 versus 53% in 2013. By comparison, in 2014, providers (n = 71) were satisfied or very satisfied 96% of the time with the quality of the work they delivered to sponsors over the preceding 3 years, as compared to 87% in 2013.

    There were other discrepancies in the survey between the perceptions of sponsors and CROs, but one of the more interesting ones relates directly to SSU activities. Respondents were asked whether sponsors engage CROs early in the process. Sixty-two percent (62%) of sponsors reported that they engage their CRO providers early in the clinical trial process always or most of the time, as opposed to 39% of providers making that claim for the same time period.

    CRO Oversight of the SSU Process
    With research showing major differences in perceptions between sponsors and CROs regarding job performance, it is not surprising that these differences exist in several areas of clinical trial operations. SSU is one function widely recognized as needing improvement, given the number of sites required for global trials, the cost of initiating one site estimated at $20,000 to $30,000 , and another $1,500 per month per site for oversight. Better SSU starts with selecting CROs able to provide full visibility of study progress and milestones, which facilitates sponsor oversight.

    For SSU, cloud-based purpose-built technology that enables secured sharing of real-time data is gaining ground among CROs. Using an application program interface (API), the technology can integrate with other eClinical functions, such as electronic data capture, the clinical trial management system, and the electronic trial master file.  This integration is pivotal for the various CROs participating in multiple studies as it optimizes flow of information among the various components. Moreover, the application acts as a single repository for in-progress documents, and information is accessed through a dashboard with a single logon, showing visualizations of study status across sites (Figure 1).

    With this solution in place, sponsors can begin the process of CRO oversight (Figure 2), starting with configuring country workflows in accordance with the sponsor’s quality standards. From this point forward, the CRO(s) can start selecting sites, and sending study-related documents, while keeping sponsors apprised of SSU status. There is real-time visibility into potential bottlenecks, allowing for prompt attention.  

    This cloud-based approach to oversight benefits sponsors and CROs alike. For sponsors, they can receive standard, consistent reporting across all CROs. They can also save CRO and site performance data for future reuse, and have full transparency at the portfolio, country, study, and site levels. Moreover, the rework and error rate would likely decline. CROs able to offer this type of efficiencies to sponsors would offer competitive advantage in a maturing CRO marketplace, and establish greater trust with the sponsor. In addition, the CRO would be able to reallocate resources to other value add tasks.

    The Value of Collaboration
    Oversight of CROs by sponsors is here to stay, but in the spirit of collaboration, oversight is most effective as a partnership in which both parties benefit. The goal of the partnership is to enable greater transparency and visibility into trial data. The intelligence gathered from the data can improve SSU by helping clinical project managers identify bottlenecks, and take corrective action faster.  

    As clinical trials include sites from across the globe, cloud-based purpose-built solutions for SSU are playing an essential role in the oversight process by enabling CROs to tap into a single system for configuring workflows. With this information, the system provides visualizations whereby sponsors can see study status in real time. This is a significant improvement over the traditional method of each CRO using its own siloed approach to data gathering and transmission, especially if it relies on an array of spreadsheets and unsecured e-mails. 

    Finally, SSU solutions are offering significant change by putting CROs and sponsors on equal footing. Research bears out this notion, with both sponsors and CROs acknowledging that use of new technology can facilitate adoption of intelligent methods of clinical development. Going forward, this approach can help clinical trial stakeholders realize the full potential of outsourcing arrangements. 


    Craig Morgan is a technology and life sciences management professional with more than 15 years of experience in the application of informatics and bioinformatics to drug discovery. He currently heads up the marketing and brand development functions at goBalto, working with sponsors, CROs and sites to reduce cycle times and improve collaboration and oversight in clinical trials.

    References
    1. Martorelli MA. Innovations in clinical research? Or old ideas in new bottles? Pharmaceutical Outsourcing Monitor. Fairmount Partners. June 2015.
    2. Garabedian G, Samon J, Collins A. Sponsor/CRO partnership optimization. Quintiles Insight Brief. 2013. Available at: http://www.quintiles.com/~/media/library/white%20papers/sponsor-cro-partnership-optimization.pdf. Accessed November 4, 2015.
    3. Morrison R, Gagnon B. The speed to quality results. Comprehend.
    4. Getz K. START Study Tufts CSDD-goBalto, 2012. Uncovering the drivers of R&D costs.
    5. Wright T. 2015 Outsourcing survey. Contract Pharma. May 2015.  Available at: http://www.contractpharma.com/contents/view_outsourcing-survey/2015-05-13/2015-annual-outsourcing-survey. Accessed October 14, 2015.
    6. ISR projects a 7.4% compound annual growth rate for the CRO market through 2019. ISR Reports. February 12, 2015. Available at: http://www.isrreports.com/isr-projects-7-4-compound-annual-growth-rate-cro-market-2019/. Accessed October 31, 2015.  
    7. Research and Markets, Research and Markets: The new 2015 trends of global clinical development outsourcing market, Business Wire. January 30, 2015. Available at: http://www.businesswire.com/news/home/20150130005621/en/Research-Markets-2015-Trends-Global-Clinical-Development#.VW3x01xViko. Accessed October 11, 2015. 
    8. Guidance for Industry: Oversight of clinical investigations — A risk-based approach to monitoring. Food and Drug Administration. August 2013. Available at: http://www.fda.gov/downloads/Drugs/.../Guidances/UCM269919.pdf. Accessed November 3, 2015.
    9. Lamberti MJ, Brothers C, Manak D, Getz K. Benchmarking the study initiation process. Therapeutic Innovation & Regulatory Science. 2013;47(1):101-9.      
    10. The Avoca Group. The 2013 Avoca Report. Sponsor and provider perceptions of managing clinical development risk. Executive Summary. 2013. Available at: http://www.slideshare.net/AvocaGroup/2013-avoca-industry-survey-executive-summary. Accessed November 4, 2015.
    11. The Avoca Group. “Intelligent” approaches to clinical development. September 2014. Available at: http://www2.theavocagroup.com/content/documents/files/2014_Avoca_Industry_Report_Executive_Summary_(2)1.pdf. Accessed November 2, 2015.
    12. Miseta E. Bring down the cost of clinical trials with improved site selection. Clinical Leader. December 19, 2013. Available at: http://www.clinicalleader.com/doc/bring-down-the-cost-of-clinical-trials-with-improved-site-selection-0001. Accessed October 31, 2015.
    13. Chung J. Bringing speed to study startup. Drug Discovery & Development. July 2015. Available at: Available at: http://www.dddmag.com/articles/2015/07/bringing-speed-study-startup. Accessed November 3, 2015.
    Related Searches
    • www.contractpharma.com
    • Clinical Trials
    • Clinical Trial
    • collaboration
    Suggested For You
    Merck Teams With Aduro Biotech on Cancer Drug Trial Merck Teams With Aduro Biotech on Cancer Drug Trial
    So You Think You Know  All About Excipients? So You Think You Know All About Excipients?
    CROs & Next-Gen  Drug Development CROs & Next-Gen Drug Development
    Edge Pharmacy Services Investing $1.5 Million in Facility Expansion Edge Pharmacy Services Investing $1.5 Million in Facility Expansion
    Aseptic Manufacturing Trends Roundtable Aseptic Manufacturing Trends Roundtable
    Elemental Impurities: A Virtual Company Perspective Elemental Impurities: A Virtual Company Perspective
    Reality and Un-Reality:  Continuous Processing in Pharmaceutical Manufacturing Reality and Un-Reality: Continuous Processing in Pharmaceutical Manufacturing
    DCAT Week DCAT Week '17 Q&A: API Market Trends
    Precision Medicine Precision Medicine
    Q BioMed in Cancer Development Pact Q BioMed in Cancer Development Pact
    CRO-Sponsor Partnerships CRO-Sponsor Partnerships
    Pivot Acquires IndUS Pivot Acquires IndUS
    Brazilian Pharmaceutical Market Poised for Growth Brazilian Pharmaceutical Market Poised for Growth
    Optimizing Clinical Ops: What’s holding up IT advances? Optimizing Clinical Ops: What’s holding up IT advances?
    Using Technology to Improve Study Startup Using Technology to Improve Study Startup

    Related Features

    • How Can We Predict Immunogenicity Earlier in Drug Discovery?

      How Can We Predict Immunogenicity Earlier in Drug Discovery?

      Identifying potential immune responses earlier in the development of biotherapeutics.
      Kevin Merlo and Tim Moran, Dassault Systèmes Biovia 09.01.17

    • Tracking Health

      Tracking Health

      Exploring the impact of wearable health monitoring tools on CROs
      Nigel Walker 05.09.17

    • CROs and Today’s  R&D Landscape

      CROs and Today’s R&D Landscape

      John Lewis of ACRO discusses opportunities, challenges, and the future CRO
      Kristin Brooks, Associate Editor, Contract Pharma 11.09.16


    • The Human Parts of Mouse Models

      The Human Parts of Mouse Models

      The PDX model system has come back into focus
      Julia Schueler, Head of in vivo Operations, Oncotest, a Charles River company 10.11.16

    • APIs | Clinical Trial Materials
      Choosing Oral Formulations for First-in-man Clinical Trials

      Choosing Oral Formulations for First-in-man Clinical Trials

      Early formulations should be simple, but selecting a simple formulation isn’t as easy as it seems
      Jon Sutch, Senior Manager of Formulation Development, Patheon 10.11.16

    • Robust Assay Designs

      Robust Assay Designs

      Easing the transition from preclinical to clinical research
      Tim Wright, Editor, Contract Pharma 10.11.16


    • APIs | Clinical Trial Materials
      7 Steps Virtual Pharma Companies Can Take to Improve Clinical Study Success

      7 Steps Virtual Pharma Companies Can Take to Improve Clinical Study Success

      Virtual pharmaceutical companies face special challenges
      Joe Cobb, Anshul Gupte, Metrics Contract Services 10.11.16

    • Logistics | Serialization | Supply Chain
      Healthcare Companies Tackle Supply Chain Issues

      Healthcare Companies Tackle Supply Chain Issues

      UPS study shows logistics gains in some areas, challenges in others
      Jan Denecker, UPS Europe 06.02.16

    • APIs | Cleaning Validation | Validation
      Limiting APIs in Manufacturing Effluent

      Limiting APIs in Manufacturing Effluent

      An approach for setting limits on pharmaceuticals discharged in manufacturing effluent
      Joan Tell, Robert Drinane, Bruce Naumann, Jessica Vestel, and Gregory Gagliano, Merck & Co., Inc. 06.02.16


    • Clinical Trial Materials
      Who’s the Right Service Provider for You?

      Who’s the Right Service Provider for You?

      Factors to consider when choosing between using one integrated CDMO or a series of smaller functional service providers
      Raymond Peck, VxP Pharma Services 06.02.16

    • Fill/Finish | Parenterals | Supply Chain | Vials
      Biotech Boom Fuels Parenteral Market

      Biotech Boom Fuels Parenteral Market

      Assessing the trends driving parenteral manufacturing
      Colin MacKay, Symbiosis Pharmaceutical Services 06.02.16

    • APIs | Cleaning Validation | Risk Management | Validation
      Setting Health-Based Exposure Limits to Support Pharmaceutical Development and Manufacturing

      Setting Health-Based Exposure Limits to Support Pharmaceutical Development and Manufacturing

      Health-based exposure limits are needed to support risk assessments
      B.D. Naumann, P.J. Nigro, U. Bruen, L. Parola, D. Cragin and A. Schatz, Merck & Co., Inc. and Ashland, Inc. 05.05.16

    • Critical Steps for Biosimilar Assessment

      Critical Steps for Biosimilar Assessment

      Establishing “finger-print like” biosimilarity prior to the clinic
      Fiona Greer, SGS 05.05.16

    • Regulatory Affairs
      CRO Industry Update

      CRO Industry Update

      Harnessing Data in the Age of Complexity
      Kristin Brooks, Contract Pharma 05.05.16

    • Capsules | Excipients | Serialization
      The Evolution of the ‘One-Stop Shop’  in Clinical Supplies Sourcing

      The Evolution of the ‘One-Stop Shop’ in Clinical Supplies Sourcing

      What does a one-stop shop really mean and is it always best for the client?
      Paul Skultety, Alex McClung, Ted Koontz and Damian Gant, Xcelience, a division of Capsugel Dosage Form Solutions 05.05.16

    Breaking News
    • InClinica Names BD Manager
    • SCHOTT Introduces syriQ BioPure
    • Heritage Pharma Makes Leadership Changes
    • JLL and Water Street Acquire Triplefin
    • WuXi AppTec Opens Laboratory Testing Facility in NJ
    View Breaking News >
    CURRENT ISSUE

    April 2018

    • Pharmaceutical Packaging Technology
    • Elemental Impurities: The Time Has Come
    • Continuous vs. Batch Production
    • 2018: The evolution of pharmaceutical packaging
    • Formulation Development Trends
    • Changing Dynamics: The CDMO market in focus
    • Contract BioManufacturing in China: Creating a New Segment
    • View More >

    Copyright © 2018 Rodman Media. All rights reserved. Use of this constitutes acceptance of our privacy policy The material on this site may not be reproduced, distributed, transmitted, or otherwise used, except with the prior written permission of Rodman Media.