Prescrire is an independent French medical publication founded in 1981 that does not accept pharmaceutical advertising or industry funding, a rarity in the medical communication ecosystem. Each year, its team of independent reviewers compiles a list of drugs available on the market that they believe have an unfavorable balance between risks and benefits: either because safer and more effective alternatives are available, because the clinical trials that supported their approval had methodological deficiencies, or because actual use in clinical practice has revealed problems that the trials did not capture.
The Prescrire 2026 list, published at the beginning of the year, includes medications in categories ranging from antidiabetics to drugs for Alzheimer's, including decongestants and antiresorptives for osteoporosis. The criterion is not that they are dangerous in absolute terms—most are drugs legally approved by rigorous regulatory agencies—but that the benefit-risk ratio, in Prescrire's opinion, does not justify their use when alternatives exist.
Why the list exists and what it says about regulatory systems
The existence of a list of "drugs to avoid" that includes drugs approved by the FDA and the EMA is not as striking a contradiction as it seems. Regulatory approval processes evaluate whether a drug has a demonstrated benefit under the specific conditions of clinical trials and whether that benefit outweighs the risk in that context. But once on the market, the drugs are used in much larger populations, with more varied comorbidities, in combination with other drugs, and in conditions that the trials did not contemplate.
Categories on the Prescrire 2026 list (selection)
- Antidiabetics: some with cardiovascular or renal risk not sufficiently compensated by the glycemic benefit
- Alzheimer's drugs: benefit-risk relationship questioned by evidence of modest effectiveness
- Oral nasal decongestants: risk of cardiovascular events when used off-label
- Antiresorptives (osteoporosis): some with rare but serious adverse effects (osteonecrosis of the jaw)
- Inclusion criterion: more risks than benefits compared to available alternatives
The question always raised by the Prescrire list is an uncomfortable one: If these drugs have more risks than benefits according to independent evaluation, why are they still approved and available on the market? The answer is not simple. Regulatory agencies have approval criteria that do not always exactly match Prescrire's criteria. Pharmaceutical companies have incentives to keep their drugs on the market. Prescribing physicians have clinical inertia and time pressures that make it difficult to constantly update their prescribing criteria. And patients who have been taking a medication for years have a natural resistance to change, especially if they feel good on their current treatment.
What the patient can do
The practical usefulness of the Prescrire list is not to raise alarm about all prescribed medications, but to provide an independent second opinion criterion that the doctor can consider. If a patient is taking a medication that appears on the list, the appropriate response is not to unilaterally discontinue it — that can be dangerous — but to ask the doctor if there are alternatives with a better benefit-risk profile for his or her specific case.
Important: Never stop medical treatment based on a list or informative information without first consulting your doctor. The Prescrire criteria are a valuable independent reference for the medical community, but your specific clinical situation may make a drug that has an unfavorable population balance the best option for you specifically.
Share this article
