Abstract (EN)

Background: Uptake of super generic or hybrid pharmaceuticals has decelerated despite their important economic potential for the generic pharmaceutical industry. The aim of switching to these product portfolios was to enable product differentiation; however, these strategies are influenced by new semantic challenges, which have hampered the promotion of value-added pharmaceuticals or super generics in recent years. Objective: To investigate whether the use of the term ‘generic’ would reduce product liability in marketing super generic or hybrid pharmaceuticals, decrease the promotion of value-added super generic versions, or both. Methods: A literature review was conducted using MEDLINE, EMBASE, EBSCO and pharmaceutical websites to identify recent studies about super generics. Face-to-face semi-structured interviews were also conducted to evaluate the evolution in marketing super generics as an alternative product strategy for generic pharmaceutical manufacturers. Results: ‘Super generic’ as a strategic product option is still attractive but semantic challenges around these products may influence their marketing potential. Super generics are concomitant with high quality and innovation. The word ‘generic’ is avoided by some manufacturers and has been replaced by the term ‘new therapeutic entities’ or ‘improved therapeutics’ to create a new identity for super generic products.