Open this photo in gallery:
Alex Shved, a parent to two daughters under two years old, is desperate to access tumour-infiltrating lymphocyte, or TIL, therapy, which is a treatment for metastatic melanoma that uses the cells of one of his own tumours.Galit Rodan/The Globe and Mail
An Ontario father of two with Stage 4 melanoma says he is heartbroken that the provincial government’s revised rules for out-of-country medical coverage will continue to bar access to a treatment that could save his and others’ lives.
Previously, the Ontario Superior Court of Justice in September quashed the province’s decision to refuse to cover that treatment for 37-year-old Alex Shved.
On Tuesday, the provincial government announced amendments to its health insurance legislation to clarify when it will cover treatments abroad. Under the revised rules, Mr. Shved’s treatment will still not qualify.
The province said funding will only be available under certain conditions, including that the drug and its administration are already funded in Ontario, the treatment is performed in Ontario, access is temporarily unavailable, and travelling is necessary to avoid death or medically significant, irreversible tissue damage.
On Wednesday, Mr. Shved said it is “incredibly disappointing” that Ontario has taken this path, rather than helping residents like himself access vital treatments in a timely manner.
“I hoped this court battle would move things in the right direction. I didn’t realize how easily they could change the rules so that the result is still the same,” he said, expressing frustration with Premier Doug Ford and Health Minister Sylvia Jones.
“Over all, I am very disappointed with the end result.”
In a statement, Ontario said it needed to clarify its out-of-country drug funding policy, in place since 2011, because it could expose the province to financial risk.
Failing to update the regulation could cost Ontario’s drug plan $5.2-billion yearly and “create a back door for global pharmaceutical companies to avoid negotiating directly with the province to achieve more competitive pricing,” it said.
In response to the September court decision, the government said it is “exploring all available options,” including an appeal or seeking a “mutually satisfactory resolution” with Mr. Shved.
The Etobicoke father is desperate to access tumour-infiltrating lymphocyte, or TIL, therapy, which is a treatment for metastatic melanoma that uses the cells of one of his own tumours.
Ontario parents hope son’s death can change Canada’s approach to novel cancer treatments
Mr. Shved applied to Ontario’s out-of-country program to see whether the province would pay for him to be treated in the United States.
His application was rejected and he was told the program isn’t intended to be used as an interim funding route for drugs that could eventually qualify for public coverage.
In August, 2025, Health Canada approved a commercial version of TIL therapy called lifileucel. A single treatment of lifileucel costs US$515,000, not including the cost of a stay at a U.S. hospital. It is not available in Canada outside of clinical trials because it is still being reviewed for public funding.
Ms. Jones said in a statement that the regulatory change strikes a balance between protecting Ontario taxpayers and providing access to life-saving medications.
She said the change “supports a consistent, fair and transparent approach to funding decisions” and “protects the integrity of Ontario’s world-class drug approval process.”
Decisions about coverage will continue through the established application process.
In the Ontario Superior Court of Justice ruling, justices Jean‑Marc Labrosse and Sharon Shore said the province’s reasons for denying funding to Mr. Shved were unreasonable and inadequately explained, adding that he will “likely be dead by Christmas” without the requested treatment.
They sent the matter back to the executive officer of the Ontario Public Drug Programs and requested a new decision with an expedited timeline.
A third judge, David Corbett, concurred that the decision should be nullified but disagreed on the approach supported by his colleagues. He wrote that he would have directed the executive officer to recommend treatment and would have instructed the general manager of the Ontario Health Insurance Plan to expedite a funding decision.