According to industry estimates, there are around 110 proton therapy centres globally, of which only about 40 see regular patient inflow, treating 15,000–16,000 patients annually. Though India has only two centres at present, it is treating over 1,000 patients a year — with APCC catering to around 800 and Tata Memorial around 200. Based on estimates, India may see demand from over 161,000 patients by 2040.
This giant stride comes despite the fact that India and Southeast Asia’s first unit — APCC — was launched only on January 25, 2019. Though proton therapy began in the 1950s, it evolved into modern clinical proton therapy for cancer management only in the 1980s and 1990s in the US.
“India is fast evolving as a global hub, with our centre treating over 2,500 patients in the past six years. Considering India’s large population, a greater number of centres are required, and Apollo itself is planning two more in Hyderabad and Delhi,” said Karthik Anantharaman, vice-president, international business, Apollo Hospitals, who is also in charge of APCC.
Anantharaman said close to 25 per cent of APCC patients so far have been from abroad. “We are treating over 150 international patients a year now. Even patients from the US and Europe are opting for us due to cost advantage and efficiency,” he added. Most of these patients come from Mauritius, Iraq, Oman, Bahrain, Ethiopia, Kenya, Tanzania, Nigeria, Ghana, South Africa, Sri Lanka, and Bangladesh.
India’s public-sector entry into proton beam therapy through Tata Memorial marks a structural shift in access to advanced oncology care. The facility at the Advanced Centre for Treatment, Research & Education in Cancer, Kharghar — commissioned with support from the Government of India — comes years after APCC established the country’s first private proton unit. What differentiates Tata Memorial is its positioning: a high-end technology platform embedded within a subsidised, high-volume public cancer system.
Proton therapy is particularly indicated in paediatric cancers, skull-base tumours, and cases where sparing surrounding tissue is critical. Tata Memorial estimates — echoed in government and hospital communications — suggest roughly 2,000 children in India could benefit annually, but actual treated volumes remain a fraction of that.
The geographic distribution remains clustered globally, led by North America (particularly the US), Europe, and East Asia. The US alone has more than 45 centres and over 100 treatment rooms, while Europe has about 30 centres spread across countries such as Germany, the UK, and France. In Asia, capacity has expanded rapidly to nearly 40 centres, with China, Japan, and South Korea emerging as the main growth engines.
Doctors say the demand-supply imbalance in proton therapy remains stark, driven by limited capacity and the therapy’s highly specialised nature. “Currently, there are only two proton therapy centres in India... Considering there are few centres providing this technology, the existing demand-supply equation is evidently asymmetrical. There is high demand and low supply of these services,” said Ashish Joshi, director and cofounder of Mumbai Oncocare Centre. He added that the gap is particularly acute in paediatric and complex cancers, where proton therapy can offer meaningful clinical advantages. Joshi said such disparities are typical of emerging technologies but may ease over time. “As more centres are set up… there is a likelihood pricing will become more standardised and cheaper,” he said.
Ullas Batra, co-director, medical oncology and chief of thoracic oncology at Rajiv Gandhi Cancer Institute and Research Centre, said India’s demand for proton therapy far exceeds supply — models project 161,000 eligible patients by 2040, yet India has only two centres, with Tata Memorial treating 541 patients and APCC treating over 2,500. “New centres in Hyderabad and Gurugram are planned, but evidence still favours paediatric and skull-base tumours; broader use remains unproven,” he added.
“In all conventional radiation therapies, neighbouring structures are affected as well. Because of this, the risk of developing a second cancer with conventional intensity-modulated radiation therapy, electron beam therapy or X-ray-based radiation can be as high as 20–30 per cent later in life. In proton therapy, the chance of developing a second cancer can be as low as 4 per cent,” Anantharaman said.
Nilaya Varma, cofounder and chief executive officer of Primus Partners, flagged the structural imbalance between affordability and access, pointing to a dual-track system emerging in proton therapy. “There is a stark difference in pricing of proton therapy in public-sector hospitals and private hospitals,” he said, observing that while institutions such as Tata Memorial offer free or highly subsidised treatment, this often comes with long waiting times. In contrast, private providers such as APCC charge ₹25–50 lakh per treatment — still lower than global benchmarks, but beyond the reach of most Indian patients.
He emphasised the need for “blended financing models, including targeted corporate social responsibility funding, more comprehensive insurance packages for the underserved, and systematic allocation of healthcare budgets” to make expansion sustainable. He said conditional subsidies for private players, along with public-private partnerships and insurance expansion, could help scale capacity beyond metros.
Varma also pointed to medical tourism as a viable growth lever, citing early traction in the private sector. “Apollo Hospitals has reported treating more than 2,000 patients from 147 countries since 2019,” he said, adding that India’s cost advantage — often 50–60 per cent lower than Western markets — combined with initiatives such as Heal in India and e-medical visas, could help position the country as a competitive destination for proton therapy.
 "Proton therapy, cancer")