Predictive modeling and regression analysis of diverse sulfonamide compounds employed in cancer therapy

Topological indices (TIs) have rich applications in various biological contexts, particularly in therapeutic strategies for cancer. Predicting the performance of compounds in the treatment of cancer is one such application, wherein TIs offer insights into the molecular structures and related properties of compounds. By examining, various compounds exhibit different degree-based TIs, analysts can pinpoint the treatments that are most efficient for specific types of cancer. This paper specifically delves into the topological indices (TIs) implementations in forecasting the biological and physical attributes of innovative compounds utilized in addressing cancer through therapeutic interventions. The analysis being conducted to derivatives of sulfonamides, namely, 4-[(2,4-dichlorophenylsulfonamido)methyl]cyclohexanecarboxylic acid (1), ethyl 4-[(naphthalene-2-sulfonamido)methyl]cyclohexanecarboxylate (2), ethyl 4-[(2,5-dichlorophenylsulfonamido)methyl]cyclohexanecarboxylate (3), 4-[(naphthalene-2-sulfonamido)methyl]cyclohexane-1-carboxylic acid (4) and (2S)-3-methyl-2-(naphthalene-1-sulfonamido)-butanoic acid (5), is performed by utilizing edge partitioning for the computation of degree-based graph descriptors. Subsequently, a linear regression-based model is established to forecast characteristics, like, melting point and formula weight in a quantitative structure-property relationship. The outcomes emphasize the effectiveness or capability of topological indices as a valuable asset for inventing and creating of compounds within the realm of cancer therapy.

1 Introduction

Sulfa drugs, commonly known as sulfonamides, encompass a significant functional group exhibiting distinctive biological activities (Boufas et al., 2014). Apart from medicinal applications as antibacterial agent, they are also widely applied in agriculture. Various derivatives of sulfonamides are applied as enzyme inhibitors (Zhong et al., 2004) such as carbonic anhydrase (Winum et al., 2006), metalloproteinase (Cheng et al., 2008), and serine protease (Groutas et al., 2001; Supuran and Scozzafava, 2002). Celecoxib (Penning et al., 1997) and valdecoxib (Talley et al., 2000) are two sulfonamide moieties that act as cyclooxygenase inhibitors. In addition, some sulfonamide compounds show different therapeutic applications in diuretics (Burger and Abraham, 2003), hypoglycemia, HIV protease (Markgren et al., 2002) as phosphodiesterase-5 inhibitor (Rotella, 2002) and in cancer chemotherapy (Crespo et al., 2010). Recently, esters derived from sulfonamides have received considerable attention due to their potential use as cell proliferation inhibitors (Das et al., 2004). Due to the versatile applications of sulfonamides and their derivatives (Danish et al., 2019) in medicinal field, we report on five compounds, 4-[(2, 4-dichloro- phenylsulfonamido)methyl]cyclohexanecarboxylic acid (1), ethyl 4-((naphthalene-2-sulfonamido)-methyl)cyclohexanecarboxylate (2), ethyl 4-[(2, 5-dichlorophenylsulfonamido)methyl]cyclo-hexanecarboxylate (3) (Danish et al., 2021), 4-[(naphthalene-2-sulfonamido)methyl]cyclohexane-1-carboxylic acid (4) (Danish et al., 2015a), and (2S)-3-methyl-2-(naphthalene-1-sulfonamido)-butanoic acid (5) (Danish et al., 2015b).

The calculation of topological indices (TIs) for the mentioned compounds includes using their chemical configurations as well as depicting their molecular compositions. The notion of topological indices (TIs), pioneered by H. Wiener in 1947 (Wiener, 1947), proves to be a valuable tool for characterizing the constructions of molecular graphs (Ramírez Alfaro, 2022). These indices provide quantitative measures that help describe the connectivity patterns within the compounds, offering insights into the structural features of the molecules. This information is crucial for understanding the relationships between molecular structures and properties, particularly in the context of anti-cancer compounds. Some of the topological indices we have discussed include first and second Zagreb (M₁, M₂ and ^mM₂), harmonic (H), hyper Zagreb (HM), forgotten (F), reciporcal Randic (RR), Randic (RA), sum connectivity (S), geometric arithmetic (GA) and atom bond connectivity (ABC) index.

Numerical values, obtained from the molecular formulas of the compounds (Mohammed et al., 2016), are provided by these topological indices. These indices utilize mathematical algorithms based on the structural information encoded in the molecular graphs, offering quantitative insights into the compounds’ topological features and connectivity patterns. Some interesting results on topological indices are characterized in (Natarajan et al., 2022; Zaman and He, 2022; Ullah et al., 2023a; Ullah et al., 2023b; Yan et al., 2023; Zaman et al., 2023; Arockiaraj et al., 2024a; Hayat et al., 2024a; Arockiaraj et al., 2024b; Hayat et al., 2024b; Arockiaraj et al., 2024c; Chidambaram et al., 2024). This numerical representation facilitates the characterization and comparison of different molecular structures, contributing to the understanding of their properties and potential activities, including anti-cancer effects.

Molecular descriptors find applications in diverse fields, including biology and mathematics (Aslam et al., 2017; Gutman et al., 2018). In this study, linear regression (Hosamani et al., 2017) employed to calculate various properties of these compounds, such as melting point (MP) and formula weight (FW), aiming to establish correlations between topological indices (TIs) and physicochemical characterizations. Linear regression analysis may be extended to higher-order regression models by using higher-order predictor variables. In basic linear regression, a linear equation represents the connection between predictors and response variables. To represent nonlinear connections, higher-order regression models include words like squared, cubed, and interaction. Leveraging the derived correlations, QSPR modeling (Duchowicz et al., 2008) will be conducted to accurately estimate the physical and chemical characteristics of the compounds (Hansen and Jurs, 1988). The significance of employing degree-based indices for QSPR analysis stems from their simplicity, resilience, interpretability, computational efficiency, adaptability, and compatibility with graph-based approaches. These indices give useful insights into the structural aspects of molecules and can help to construct predictive models for a variety of chemical attributes.

Numerous uses exist for topological indices (TIs) in the development of compounds. By examining the molecular structures graphs utilize these indices, analysts can point-out the most efficacious compounds (Shanmukha et al., 2022) for particular types of cancer and anticipate the toxicity and potential side effects of the compounds and contribute to the invention and creation of novel compounds. In summary, the using of topological indices (TIs) in compound exploitation has the capability to significantly advance the treatment of cancer and deepen our comprehension of molecular structures.

Compounds’ molecular structures are depicted as graphs, with atoms as vertices and the connecting bonds as edges. The graph $G\left(V,E\right)$ is a straightforward, limited, and related depiction of the composition of the compound, with $V$ represents the collections of vertices and $E$ as edges, respectively. In graphical theory, the degree of node in a graph, represented by “du,” signifies the count of nodes adjacent to it. In chemistry, the valence of a compound corresponds to the degree of its associated node in the graph. The presented table (Table 1) includes information about topological indices, their notations, formulas, and the years in which they were introduced.

Table 1

Table 1. The considered topological indices, notations and formulas.

2 Results and discussions

Molecular descriptors find extensive applications in medicine, particularly in the domains of inventing and creating compounds. In the context of cancer treatment, the application of topological indices (TIs) becomes crucial for identifying potential compound candidates possessing the targeted physicochemical properties. Applying topology-related degree indices to compounds for the treatment of cancer allows for a deeper understanding of their structural characteristics and facilitates the correlation of these features with their biological activity. This approach provides valuable insights for the targeted design and discovery of compounds tailored for effective blood cancer treatment.

The quantitative structure-property relationship (QSPR) modeling approach proves beneficial for analyzing the relationship among molecular attributes and the physico-chemical characteristics of compounds for addressing cancer. These aspects are instrumental in estimating the physical and chemical characteristics of newly discovered compounds, candidates according to their structural attributes, thus enhancing the efficiency of compound discovered. By leveraging QSPR modeling, researchers can gain valuable insights into how specific structural elements influence the properties of compounds, facilitating a more informed and targeted approach to identifying promising candidates for cancer treatment.

In this study, various compounds employed in cancer treatment underwent analysis utilizing topological indices and QSPR modeling. The compounds examined encompassed 4-[(2,4-dichlorophenylsulfonamido)methyl]cyclohexanecarboxylic acid, ethyl 4-((naphthalene-2-sulfona-mido)methyl)cyclohexanecarboxylate, ethyl 4-[(2,5-dichlorophenylsulfonamido)methyl]cyclo-hexanecarboxylate, 4-[(naphthalene-2-sulfonamido)methyl]cyclohexane-1-carboxylic acid and (2S)-3-methyl-2-(naphthalene-1-sulfonamido)-butanoic acid, as illustrated by their molecular structure in Figure 1 and chemical structure in Figure 2. Employing degree-based topological indices on these compounds enabled the calculation of numerical values, facilitating the correlation of these indices with their respective physicochemical properties.

Figure 1

Figure 1. Molecular Structures of derivatives of Sulfonamides as given in (A)–(E).

Figure 2

Figure 2. Chemical Structures of derivatives of Sulfonamides as given in (A)–(E).

The findings from the current analysis hold significant implications for advancing the creation of novel compounds in the treatment of cancer. Identifying the structural attributes and physicochemical properties of effective compounds provides valuable insights for designing new compounds with comparable attributes and potentially enhanced efficacy.

Moreover, this approach supports the enhancement of existing compounds through strategic modifications to their structural features, aimed at improving physical and chemical properties and augmenting its efficacy in the treatment of cancer. Analytical regression played a crucial role in the calculations conducted in this study.

2.1 Model of regression

The model of regression serves as a valuable tool in establishing relation between molecular attributes and the physico-chemical properties of compounds employed for addressing cancer. The results indicate a robust relationship between topological indices (TIs), the physical and chemical properties of these compounds.

The utilization of topological indices (TIs) in the context of cancer research is multifaceted. These descriptors prove instrumental in analyzing the structures of various compounds used in cancer treatment, spanning chemotherapeutic agents, targeted therapies, hormonal therapies, and immunotherapies. Analyzing topological indices in compound design aids in identifying new compounds and optimizing those already in existence. For instance, molecular descriptors enable the prediction of the efficacy of novel compounds in the treatment of cancer by scrutinizing their inherent structure.

Furthermore, Topological indices play a crucial role in determining the mechanism of action of compounds for addressing cancer, offering insightful understandings into the biological processes, underlying these compounds. In summary, the integration of topological indices (TIs) in cancer studies holds the potential to unearth new compounds and enhance the effectiveness of those already in use. The acquired outcomes undergo rigorous testing through mathematical expression 1.

$P=A+B\left(TI\right)(1)$

Here, the sign P signifies a parameter associated with the physical and chemical properties of a compound. TI stands for some topological indices, whereas A, B represent the coefficients of regression utilized in this observation. With the aid of a linear QSPR model, the eleven TIs of potential cancer treatments are examined, as well as their physical characteristics. Using (1), we create a linear regression model for TIs of the potential compounds listed below.

Theorem 1. Let G₁ denotes the 4-[(2, 4-dichlorophenylsulfonamido)methyl]cyclohexane carboxylic acid, then the following axioms holds;

i. M₁ (G₁) = 136

ii. M₂ (G₁) = 162

iii. ^mM₂ (G₁) = 5.58

iv. H (G₁) = 11.18

v. HM(G₁) = 714

vi. F (G₁) = 390

vii. RR (G₁) = 64.17

viii. RA (G₁) = 12.01

ix. S (G₁) = 12.22

x. GA (G₁) = 25.38

xi. ABC(G₁) = 19.82

Proof. Let G₁ belongs to 4-[(2,4-dichlorophenylsulfonamido)methyl]cyclohexane carboxylic acid, with the edge set represented as E and E¹ (u, v) denoting the set of edges in G₁ that adds degrees vertices “u” and “v,” the frequencies are provided as follows:

|E¹_1,3 | = 4, |E¹_2,2 | = 3, |E¹_2,3 | = 9, |E¹_3,4 | = 4, |E¹_1,2 | = 1, |E¹_3,3 | = 2, |E¹_1,4 | = 4. Then.

i) By applying the first Zagreb index (M₁) and the provided edge partitions E¹ (u, v), we obtain:

$\begin{array}{l}{M}_1\left(G_1\right)=4\left(1+3\right)+3\left(2+2\right)+9\left(2+3\right)+4\left(3+4\right)+1\left(1+2\right)+2\left(3+3\right)+4\left(1+4\right)=136\end{array}$

ii) By applying new version first Zagreb index (M₂) and the provided edge partitions E¹ (u, v), we obtain:

$\begin{array}{l}{M}_2\left(G_1\right)=4\left(1\times 3\right)+3\left(2\times 2\right)+9\left(2\times 3\right)+4\left(3\times 4\right)+1\left(1\times 2\right)+2\left(3\times 3\right)+4\left(1\times 4\right)=162\end{array}$

iii) By applying second Zagreb index (^mM₂) and the provided edge partitions E¹ (u, v), we obtain:

$\begin{array}{l}{M}_2^m\left(G_1\right)=4\left(\frac{1}{1+3}\right)+3\left(\frac{1}{2+2}\right)+9\left(\frac{1}{2+3}\right)+4\left(\frac{1}{3+4}\right)+1\left(\frac{1}{1+2}\right)+2\left(\frac{1}{3+3}\right)+4\left(\frac{1}{1+4}\right)=5.58\end{array}$

iv) By applying harmonic index (H) and the provided edge partitions E¹ (u, v), we obtain:

$\begin{array}{l}H\left(G_1\right)=4\left(\frac{2}{1+3}\right)+3\left(\frac{2}{2+2}\right)+9\left(\frac{2}{2+3}\right)+4\left(\frac{2}{3+4}\right)+1\left(\frac{2}{1+2}\right)+2\left(\frac{2}{3+3}\right)+4\left(\frac{2}{1+4}\right)=11.18\end{array}$

v) By applying hyper Zagreb index (HM) and the provided edge partitions E¹ (u, v), we obtain:

$\begin{array}{l}HM\left(G_1\right)=4{\left(1+3\right)}^2+3{\left(2+2\right)}^2+9{\left(2+3\right)}^2+4{\left(3+4\right)}^2+1{\left(1+2\right)}^2+2{\left(3+3\right)}^2+4{\left(1+4\right)}^2=714\end{array}$

vi) By applying forgotten index (F) and the provided edge partitions E¹ (u, v), we obtain:

$\begin{array}{l}F\left(G_1\right)=4\left(1^2+3^2\right)+3\left(2^2+2^2\right)+9\left(2^2+3^2\right)+4\left(3^2+4^2\right)+1\left(1^2+2^2\right)+2\left(3^2+3^2\right)+4\left(1^2+4^2\right)=390\end{array}$

vii) By applying reciprocal randic index (RR) and the provided edge partitions E¹ (u, v), we obtain:

$\begin{array}{l}RR\left(G_1\right)=4\sqrt{1\times 3}+3\sqrt{2\times 2}+9\sqrt{2\times 3}+4\sqrt{3\times 4}+1\sqrt{1\times 2}+2\sqrt{3\times 3}+4\sqrt{1\times 4}=64.17\\ \end{array}$

viii) By applying randic index (RA) and the provided edge partitions E¹ (u, v), we obtain:

$\begin{array}{l}RA\left(G_1\right)=4\sqrt{\frac{1}{1\times 3}}+3\sqrt{\frac{1}{2\times 2}}+9\sqrt{\frac{1}{2\times 3}}+4\sqrt{\frac{1}{3\times 4}}+1\sqrt{\frac{1}{1\times 2}}+2\sqrt{\frac{1}{3\times 3}}+4\sqrt{\frac{1}{1\times 4}}=12.01\end{array}$

ix) By applying sum connectivity index (S) and the provided edge partitions E¹ (u, v), we obtain:

$\begin{array}{l}S\left(G_1\right)=4\sqrt{\frac{1}{1+3}}+3\sqrt{\frac{1}{2+2}}+9\sqrt{\frac{1}{2+3}}+4\sqrt{\frac{1}{3+4}}+1\sqrt{\frac{1}{1+2}}+2\sqrt{\frac{1}{3+3}}+4\sqrt{\frac{1}{1+4}}=12.22\end{array}$

x) By applying geometric arithmetic index (GA) and the provided edge partitions E¹ (u, v), we obtain:

$\begin{array}{l}GA\left(G_1\right)=2\left(4\frac{\sqrt{1\times 3}}{1+3}\right)+2\left(3\frac{\sqrt{2\times 2}}{2+2}\right)+2\left(9\frac{\sqrt{2\times 3}}{2+3}\right)+2\left(4\frac{\sqrt{3\times 4}}{3+4}\right)+2\left(1\frac{\sqrt{1\times 2}}{1+2}\right)+2\left(2\frac{\sqrt{3\times 3}}{3+3}\right)+2\left(4\frac{\sqrt{1\times 4}}{1+4}\right)=25.38\end{array}$

xi) By applying atom bond connectivity index (ABC) and the provided edge partitions E¹ (u, v), we obtain:

$\begin{array}{l}ABC\left(G_1\right)=4\sqrt{\frac{1+3-2}{1\times 3}}+3\sqrt{\frac{2+2-2}{2\times 2}}+9\sqrt{\frac{2+3-2}{2\times 3}}+4\sqrt{\frac{3+4-2}{3\times 4}}+1\sqrt{\frac{1+2-2}{1\times 2}}+2\sqrt{\frac{3+3-2}{3\times 3}}\\ +4\sqrt{\frac{1+4-2}{1\times 4}}=19.82\end{array}$

Theorem 2. Let G₂ denotes the ethyl 4-[(naphthalene-2-sulfonamido)methyl]cyclohexane carboxylate, then the following axioms satisfied for G_2.

i. M₁ (G₂) = 186

ii. M₂ (G₂) = 222

iii. ^mM₂ (G₂) = 7.19

iv. H (G₂) = 14.39

v. HM(G₂) = 996

vi. F (G₂) = 552

vii. RR (G₂) = 87.09

viii. RA (G₂) = 15.56

ix. S (G₂) = 16.03

x. GA (G₂) = 33.61

xi. ABC(G₂) = 26.67

Proof. Let G₂ belongs to ethyl 4-[(naphthalene-2-sulfonamido)methyl]cyclohexane carboxylate with the edge set represented as E² and E² (u, v) denoting the set of edges in G₂ that adds degrees vertices “u” and “v,” the frequencies are provided as follows:

|E²_(2,2)| = 6, |E²_(2,3)| = 11, |E²_(3,4)| = 4, |E²_(1,4)| = 9, |E²_(1,3)| = 2, |E²_(3,3)| = 2, |E²_(2,4) | = 1, |E²_(4,4)| = 1. Then.

i) Applying first Zagreb index (M₁) and the provided edge partition E² (u, v), we obtain:

$\begin{array}{l}{M}_1\left(G_2\right)=6\left(2+2\right)+11\left(2+3\right)+4\left(3+4\right)+9\left(1+4\right)+2\left(1+3\right)+2\left(3+3\right)+1\left(2+4\right)+1\left(4+4\right)=186\end{array}$

ii) By applying new version first Zagreb index (M₂) and the provided edge partition E² (u, v), we obtain:

$\begin{array}{l}{M}_2\left(G_2\right)=6\left(2\times 2\right)+11\left(2\times 3\right)+4\left(3\times 4\right)+9\left(1\times 4\right)+2\left(1\times 3\right)+2\left(3\times 3\right)+1\left(2\times 4\right)+1\left(4\times 4\right)=222\end{array}$

iii) By applying second Zagreb index (^mM₂) and the provided edge partition E² (u, v), we obtain:

$\begin{array}{l}{}^m{M}_2\left(G_2\right)=6\left(\frac{1}{2+2}\right)+11\left(\frac{1}{2+3}\right)+4\left(\frac{1}{3+4}\right)+9\left(\frac{1}{1+4}\right)+2\left(\frac{1}{1+3}\right)+2\left(\frac{1}{3+3}\right)+1\left(\frac{1}{2+4}\right)+1\left(\frac{1}{4+4}\right)=7.19\end{array}$

iv) By applying harmonic index (H) and the provided edge partition E² (u, v), we obtain:

$\begin{array}{l}H\left(G_2\right)=6\left(\frac{2}{2+2}\right)+11\left(\frac{2}{2+3}\right)+4\left(\frac{2}{3+4}\right)+9\left(\frac{2}{1+4}\right)+2\left(\frac{2}{1+3}\right)+2\left(\frac{2}{3+3}\right)+1\left(\frac{2}{2+4}\right)+1\left(\frac{2}{4+4}\right)=14.39\end{array}$

v) By applying hyper Zagreb index (HM) and the provided edge partition E² (u, v), we obtain:

$\begin{array}{l}HM\left(G_2\right)=6{\left(2+2\right)}^2+11{\left(2+3\right)}^2+4{\left(3+4\right)}^2+9{\left(1+4\right)}^2+2{\left(1+3\right)}^2+2{\left(3+3\right)}^2+1{\left(2+4\right)}^2+1{\left(4+4\right)}^2=996\end{array}$

vi) By applying forgotten index (F) and the provided edge partition E² (u, v), we obtain:

$\begin{array}{l}F\left(G_2\right)=6\left(2^2+2^2\right)+11\left(2^2+3^2\right)+4\left(3^2+4^2\right)+9\left(1^2+4^2\right)+2\left(1^2+3^2\right)+2\left(3^2+3^2\right)+1\left(2^2+4^2\right)+1\left(4^2+4^2\right)=552\end{array}$

vii) By applying reciprocal randic index (RR) and the provided edge partition E² (u, v), we obtain:

$\begin{array}{l}RR\left(G_2\right)=6\sqrt{2\times 2}+11\sqrt{2\times 3}+4\sqrt{3\times 4}+9\sqrt{1\times 4}+2\sqrt{1\times 3}+2\sqrt{3\times 3}+1\sqrt{2\times 4}+1\sqrt{4\times 4}=87.09\\ \end{array}$

viii) By applying randic index (RA) and the provided edge partition E² (u, v), we obtain:

$\begin{array}{l}RA\left(G_2\right)=6\sqrt{\frac{1}{2\times 2}}+11\sqrt{\frac{1}{2\times 3}}+4\sqrt{\frac{1}{3\times 4}}+9\sqrt{\frac{1}{1\times 4}}+2\sqrt{\frac{1}{1\times 3}}+2\sqrt{\frac{1}{3\times 3}}+1\sqrt{\frac{1}{2\times 4}}+1\sqrt{\frac{1}{4\times 4}}=15.56\\ \end{array}$

ix) By applying sum connectivity index (S) and the provided edge partition E² (u, v), we obtain:

$\begin{array}{l}S\left(G_2\right)=6\sqrt{\frac{1}{2+2}}+11\sqrt{\frac{1}{2+3}}+4\sqrt{\frac{1}{3+4}}+9\sqrt{\frac{1}{1+4}}+2\sqrt{\frac{1}{1+3}}+2\sqrt{\frac{1}{3+3}}+1\sqrt{\frac{1}{2+4}}+1\sqrt{\frac{1}{4+4}}=16.03\end{array}$

x) By applying geometric arithmetic index (GA) and the provided edge partition E² (u, v), we obtain:

$\begin{array}{l}GA\left(G_2\right)=2\left(6\frac{\sqrt{2\times 2}}{2+2}\right)+2\left(11\frac{\sqrt{2\times 3}}{2+3}\right)+2\left(4\frac{\sqrt{3\times 4}}{3+4}\right)+2\left(9\frac{\sqrt{1\times 4}}{1+4}\right)+2\left(2\frac{\sqrt{1\times 3}}{1+3}\right)+2\left(2\frac{\sqrt{3\times 3}}{3+3}\right)\\ +2\left(1\frac{\sqrt{2\times 4}}{2+4}\right)+2\left(1\frac{\sqrt{4\times 4}}{4+4}\right)=33.61\\ \end{array}$

xi) By applying atom bond connectivity index (ABC) and the provided edge partition E² (u, v), we obtain:

$\begin{array}{l}ABC\left(G_2\right)=6\sqrt{\frac{2+2-2}{2\times 2}}+11\sqrt{\frac{2+3-2}{2\times 3}}+4\sqrt{\frac{3+4-2}{3\times 4}}+9\sqrt{\frac{1+4-2}{1\times 4}}+2\sqrt{\frac{1+3-2}{1\times 3}}+2\sqrt{\frac{3+3-2}{3\times 3}}\\ +1\sqrt{\frac{2+4-2}{2\times 4}}+1\sqrt{\frac{4+4-2}{4\times 4}}=6.67\\ \end{array}$

Theorem 3. Let G₃ denotes the ethyl 4-[(2, 5-dichlorophenylsulfonamido)methyl]cyclohexane carboxylate, then the following axioms satisfied for G_3.

i. M₁ (G₃) = 172

ii. M₂ (G₃) = 204

iii. ^mM₂ (G₃) = 6.54

iv. H (G₃) = 13.09

v. HM(G₃) = 930

vi. F (G₃) = 522

vii. RR (G₃) = 79.67

viii. RA (G₃) = 14.4

ix. S (G₃) = 14.63

x. GA (G₃) = 30.38

xi. ABC(G₃) = 24.76

Proof. Let G₃ belongs to ethyl 4-[(2,5-dichlorophenylsulfonamido)methyl]cyclohexane carboxylate with the edge set represented as E³ and E³ (u,v) denoting the set of edges in G₃ that adds degrees vertices “u” and “v,” the frequencies are provided as follows:

|E³_(1,3)| = 4, |E³_(2,3)| = 9, |E³_(2,2)| = 3, |E³_(1,4)| = 9, |E³_(3,4)| = 4, |E³_(4,4)| = 1, |E³_(3,3) | = 2, |E³_(2,4)| = 1. Then.

i) By applying first Zagreb index (M₁) and the provided edge partitions E³ (u, v), we obtain:

$\begin{array}{l}{M}_1^m\left(G_3\right)=4\left(1+3\right)+9\left(2+3\right)+3\left(2+2\right)+9\left(1+4\right)+4\left(3+4\right)+1\left(4+4\right)+2\left(3+3\right)+1\left(2+4\right)=172\end{array}$

ii) By applying new version first Zagreb index (M₂) and the provided edge partitions E³ (u, v), we obtain:

$\begin{array}{l}{M}_2\left(G_3\right)=4\left(1\times 3\right)+9\left(2\times 3\right)+3\left(2\times 2\right)+9\left(1\times 4\right)+4\left(3\times 4\right)+1\left(4\times 4\right)+2\left(3+3\right)+1\left(2\times 4\right)=204\\ \end{array}$

iii) By applying second Zagreb index (^mM₂) and the provided edge partitions E³ (u, v), we obtain:

$\begin{array}{l}{M}_2\left(G_3\right)=4\left(\frac{1}{1+3}\right)+9\left(\frac{1}{2+3}\right)+3\left(\frac{1}{2+2}\right)+9\left(\frac{1}{1+4}\right)+4\left(\frac{1}{3+4}\right)+1\left(\frac{1}{4+4}\right)+2\left(\frac{1}{3+3}\right)+1\left(\frac{1}{2+4}\right)=6.54\\ \end{array}$

iv) By applying harmonic index (H) and the provided edge partitions E³ (u, v), we obtain:

$\begin{array}{l}H\left(G_3\right)=4\left(\frac{2}{1+3}\right)+9\left(\frac{2}{2+3}\right)+3\left(\frac{2}{2+2}\right)+9\left(\frac{2}{1+4}\right)+4\left(\frac{2}{3+4}\right)+1\left(\frac{2}{4+4}\right)+2\left(\frac{2}{3+3}\right)+1\left(\frac{2}{2+4}\right)=13.09\\ \end{array}$

v) By applying hyper Zagreb index (HM) and the provided edge partitions E³ (u, v), we obtain:

$\begin{array}{l}HM\left(G_3\right)=4{\left(1+3\right)}^2+9{\left(2+3\right)}^2+3{\left(2+2\right)}^2+9{\left(1+4\right)}^2+4{\left(3+4\right)}^2+1{\left(4+4\right)}^2+2{\left(3+3\right)}^2+1{\left(2+4\right)}^2=930\end{array}$

vi) By applying forgotten index (F) and the provided edge partitions E³ (u, v), we obtain:

$\begin{array}{l}F\left(G_3\right)=4\left(1^2+3^2\right)+9\left(2^2+3^2\right)+3\left(2^2+2^2\right)+9\left(1^2+4^2\right)+4\left(3^2+4^2\right)+1\left(4^2+4^2\right)+2\left(3^2+3^2\right)+1\left(2^2+4^2\right)=522\end{array}$

vii) By applying reciprocal randic index (RR) and the provided edge partitions E³ (u, v), we obtain:

$\begin{array}{l}RR\left(G_3\right)=4\sqrt{1\times 3}+9\sqrt{2\times 3}+3\sqrt{2\times 2}+9\sqrt{1\times 4}+4\sqrt{3\times 4}+1\sqrt{4\times 4}+2\sqrt{3\times 3}+1\sqrt{2\times 4}=79.67\end{array}$

viii) By applying randic index (RA) and the provided edge partitions E³ (u, v), we obtain:

$\begin{array}{l}RA\left(G_3\right)=4\sqrt{\frac{1}{1\times 3}}+9\sqrt{\frac{1}{2\times 3}}+3\sqrt{\frac{1}{2\times 2}}+9\sqrt{\frac{1}{1\times 4}}+4\sqrt{\frac{1}{3\times 4}}+1\sqrt{\frac{1}{4\times 4}}+2\sqrt{\frac{1}{3\times 3}}+1\sqrt{\frac{1}{2\times 4}}=14.4\end{array}$

ix) By applying sum connectivity index (S) and the provided edge partitions E³ (u, v), we obtain:

$\begin{array}{l}S\left(G_3\right)=4\sqrt{\frac{1}{1+3}}+9\sqrt{\frac{1}{2+3}}+3\sqrt{\frac{1}{2+2}}+9\sqrt{\frac{1}{1+4}}+4\sqrt{\frac{1}{3+4}}+1\sqrt{\frac{1}{4+4}}+2\sqrt{\frac{1}{3+3}}+1\sqrt{\frac{1}{2+4}}=14.63\end{array}$

x) By applying geometric arithmetic index (GA) and the provided edge partitions E³ (u, v), we obtain:

$\begin{array}{l}GA\left(G_3\right)=2\left(4\frac{\sqrt{1\times 3}}{1+3}\right)+2\left(9\frac{\sqrt{2\times 3}}{2+3}\right)+2\left(3\frac{\sqrt{2\times 2}}{2+2}\right)+2\left(9\frac{\sqrt{1\times 4}}{1+4}\right)+2\left(4\frac{\sqrt{3\times 4}}{3+4}\right)+2\left(1\frac{\sqrt{4\times 4}}{4+4}\right)\\ +2\left(2\frac{\sqrt{3\times 3}}{3+3}\right)+2\left(1\frac{\sqrt{2\times 4}}{2+4}\right)=30.38\\ \end{array}$

xi) By applying atom bond connectivity index (ABC) and the provided edge partitions E³ (u, v), we obtain:

$\begin{array}{l}ABC\left(G_3\right)=4\sqrt{\frac{1+3-2}{1\times 3}}+9\sqrt{\frac{2+3-2}{2\times 3}}+3\sqrt{\frac{2+2-2}{2\times 2}}+9\sqrt{\frac{1+4-2}{1\times 4}}+4\sqrt{\frac{3+4-2}{3\times 4}}+1\sqrt{\frac{4+4-2}{4\times 4}}\\ +2\sqrt{\frac{3+3-2}{3\times 3}}+1\sqrt{\frac{2+4-2}{2\times 4}}=24.76\\ \end{array}$

Theorem 4. Let G₄ denotes the 4-[(naphthalene-2-sulfonamido)methyl]cyclohexane-1-carboxylic acid, then the following axioms satisfied for G_4.

i. M₁ (G₄) = 150

ii. M₂ (G₄) = 180

iii. ^mM₂ (G₄) = 6.33

iv. H (G₄) = 12.49

v. HM(G₄) = 780

vi. F (G₄) = 420

vii. RR (G₄) = 72.66

viii. RA (G₄) = 13.2

ix. S (G₄) = 13.67

x. GA (G₄) = 28.62

xi. ABC(G₄) = 21.82

Proof. Let G₄ belongs to 4-[(naphthalene-2-sulfonamido)methyl]cyclohexane-1-carboxylic acid with the edge set represented as E⁴ and E⁴ (u,v) denoting the set of edges in G₄ that adds degrees vertices “u” and “v,” the frequencies are provided as follows:

|E⁴_1,2 | = 1, |E⁴_1,3| = 2, |E⁴_1,4 | = 4, |E⁴_2,2 | = 6, |E⁴_2,3 | = 11, |E⁴_3,3 | = 2, |E⁴_3,4 | = 4. Then.

i) By applying first Zagreb index (M₁) and the provided edge partitions E⁴ (u, v), we obtain:

$\begin{array}{l}{M}_1\left(G_4\right)=2\left(1+3\right)+11\left(2+3\right)+6\left(2+2\right)+4\left(1+4\right)+4\left(3+4\right)+1\left(1+2\right)+2\left(3+3\right)=150\\ \end{array}$

ii) By applying new version first Zagreb index (M₂) and the provided edge partitions E⁴ (u, v), we obtain:

$\begin{array}{l}{M}_2\left(G_4\right)=2\left(1\times 3\right)+11\left(2\times 3\right)+6\left(2\times 2\right)+4\left(1\times 4\right)+4\left(3\times 4\right)+1\left(1\times 2\right)+2\left(3+3\right)=180\\ \end{array}$

iii) By applying second Zagreb index (^mM₂) and the provided edge partitions E⁴ (u, v), we obtain:

$\begin{array}{l}{}^m{M}_2\left(G_4\right)=2\left(\frac{1}{1+3}\right)+11\left(\frac{1}{2+3}\right)+6\left(\frac{1}{2+2}\right)+4\left(\frac{1}{1+4}\right)+4\left(\frac{1}{3+4}\right)+1\left(\frac{1}{1+2}\right)+2\left(\frac{1}{3+3}\right)\\ =6.33\end{array}$

iv) By applying harmonic index (H) and the provided edge partitions E⁴ (u, v), we obtain:

$\begin{array}{l}H\left(G_4\right)=2\left(\frac{2}{1+3}\right)+11\left(\frac{2}{2+3}\right)+6\left(\frac{2}{2+2}\right)+4\left(\frac{2}{1+4}\right)+4\left(\frac{2}{3+4}\right)+1\left(\frac{2}{1+2}\right)+2\left(\frac{2}{3+3}\right)=12.49\\ \end{array}$

v) By applying hyper Zagreb index (HM) and the provided edge partitions E⁴ (u, v), we obtain:

$\begin{array}{l}HM\left(G_4\right)=2{\left(1+3\right)}^2+11{\left(2+3\right)}^2+6{\left(2+2\right)}^2+4{\left(1+4\right)}^2+4{\left(3+4\right)}^2+1{\left(1+2\right)}^2+2{\left(3+3\right)}^2=780\\ \end{array}$

vi) By applying forgotten index (F) and the provided edge partitions E⁴ (u, v), we obtain:

$\begin{array}{l}F\left(G_4\right)=2\left(1^2+3^2\right)+11\left(2^2+3^2\right)+6\left(2^2+2^2\right)+4\left(1^2+4^2\right)+4\left(3^2+4^2\right)+1\left(1^2+2^2\right)+2\left(3^2+3^2\right)=420\end{array}$

vii) By applying reciprocal randic index (RR) and the provided edge partitions E⁴ (u, v), we obtain:

$\begin{array}{l}RR\left(G_4\right)=2\sqrt{1\times 3}+11\sqrt{2\times 3}+6\sqrt{2\times 2}+4\sqrt{1\times 4}+4\sqrt{3\times 4}+1\sqrt{1\times 2}+2\sqrt{3\times 3}=72.66\end{array}$

viii) By applying randic index (RA) and the provided edge partitions E⁴ (u, v), we obtain:

$\begin{array}{l}RA\left(G_4\right)=2\sqrt{\frac{1}{1\times 3}}+11\sqrt{\frac{1}{2\times 3}}+6\sqrt{\frac{1}{2\times 2}}+4\sqrt{\frac{1}{1\times 4}}+4\sqrt{\frac{1}{3\times 4}}+1\sqrt{\frac{1}{1\times 2}}+2\sqrt{\frac{1}{3\times 3}}=13.2\end{array}$

ix) By applying sum connectivity index (S) and the provided edge partitions E⁴ (u, v), we obtain:

$\begin{array}{l}S\left(G_4\right)=2\sqrt{\frac{1}{1+3}}+11\sqrt{\frac{1}{2+3}}+6\sqrt{\frac{1}{2+2}}+4\sqrt{\frac{1}{1+4}}+4\sqrt{\frac{1}{3+4}}+1\sqrt{\frac{1}{1+2}}+2\sqrt{\frac{1}{3+3}}=13.67\\ \end{array}$

x) By applying geometric arithmetic index (GA) and the provided edge partitions E⁴ (u, v), we obtain:

$\begin{array}{l}GA\left(G_4\right)=2\left(2\frac{\sqrt{1\times 3}}{1+3}\right)+2\left(11\frac{\sqrt{2\times 3}}{2+3}\right)+2\left(6\frac{\sqrt{2\times 2}}{2+2}\right)+2\left(4\frac{\sqrt{1\times 4}}{1+4}\right)+2\left(4\frac{\sqrt{3\times 4}}{3+4}\right)+2\left(1\frac{\sqrt{1\times 2}}{1+2}\right)\\ +2\left(2\frac{\sqrt{3\times 3}}{3+3}\right)=28.62\\ \end{array}$

xi) By applying atom bond connectivity index (ABC) and the provided edge partitions E⁴ (u, v), we obtain:

$\begin{array}{l}ABC\left(G_4\right)=2\sqrt{\frac{1+3-2}{1\times 3}}+11\sqrt{\frac{2+3-2}{2\times 3}}+6\sqrt{\frac{2+2-2}{2\times 2}}+4\sqrt{\frac{1+4-2}{1\times 4}}+4\sqrt{\frac{3+4-2}{3\times 4}}+1\sqrt{\frac{1+2-2}{1\times 2}}\\ +2\sqrt{\frac{3+3-2}{3\times 3}}=21.82\\ \end{array}$

Theorem 5. Let G₅ denotes the (2S)-3-methyl-2-(naphthalene-1-sulfonamido)-butanoic acid, then the following axioms satisfied for G_5.

i. M₁ (𝐺₅) = 170

ii. M₂ (𝐺₅) = 211

iii. ^mM₂ (𝐺₅) = 6.35

iv. H (G₅) = 12.71

v. HM(G₅) = 954

vi. F (G₅) = 532

vii. RR (G₅) = 78.86

viii. RA (G₅) = 13.98

ix. S (G₅) = 14.21

x. GA (G₅) = 29.5

xi. ABC(G₅) = 23.94

Proof. Let G₅ belongs to (2S)-3-methyl-2-(naphthalene-1-sulfonamido)-butanoic acid with the edge set represented as E⁵ and E⁵ (u, v) denoting the set of edges in G₅ that adds degrees vertices “u” and “v,” the frequencies are provided as follows:

|E⁵_1,2 | = 1, |E⁵_1,3| = 2, |E⁵_1,4 | = 10, |E⁵_2,2 | = 4, |E⁵_2,3 | = 7, |E⁵_3,3 | = 1, |E⁵_3,4 | = 4, |E⁵_4,4 | = 3. Then.

i) By applying first Zagreb index (M₁) and the provided edge partitions E⁵ (u, v), we obtain:

$\begin{array}{l}{M}_1^m\left(G_5\right)=2\left(1+3\right)+7\left(2+3\right)+4\left(2+2\right)+10\left(1+4\right)+4\left(3+4\right)+3\left(4+4\right)+1\left(3+3\right)+1\left(1+2\right)=170\end{array}$

ii) By applying new version first Zagreb index (M₂) and the provided edge partitions E⁵ (u, v), we obtain:

$\begin{array}{l}{M}_2\left(G_5\right)=2\left(1\times 3\right)+7\left(2\times 3\right)+4\left(2\times 2\right)+10\left(1\times 4\right)+4\left(3\times 4\right)+3\left(4\times 4\right)+1\left(3+3\right)+1\left(1\times 2\right)=211\\ \end{array}$

iii) By applying second Zagreb index (^mM₂) and the provided edge partitions E⁵ (u, v), we obtain:

$\begin{array}{l}{M}_2\left(G_5\right)=2\left(\frac{1}{1+3}\right)+7\left(\frac{1}{2+3}\right)+4\left(\frac{1}{2+2}\right)+10\left(\frac{1}{1+4}\right)+4\left(\frac{1}{3+4}\right)+3\left(\frac{1}{4+4}\right)+1\left(\frac{1}{3+3}\right)+1\left(\frac{1}{1+2}\right)=6.35\\ \end{array}$

iv) By applying harmonic index (H) and the provided edge partitions E⁵ (u, v), we obtain:

$\begin{array}{l}H\left(G_5\right)=2\left(\frac{2}{1+3}\right)+7\left(\frac{2}{2+3}\right)+4\left(\frac{2}{2+2}\right)+10\left(\frac{2}{1+4}\right)+4\left(\frac{2}{3+4}\right)+3\left(\frac{2}{4+4}\right)+1\left(\frac{2}{3+3}\right)+1\left(\frac{2}{1+2}\right)=12.71\\ \end{array}$

v) By applying hyper Zagreb index (HM) and the provided edge partitions E⁵ (u, v), we obtain:

$\begin{array}{l}HM\left(G_5\right)=2{\left(1+3\right)}^2+7{\left(2+3\right)}^2+4{\left(2+2\right)}^2+10{\left(1+4\right)}^2+4{\left(3+4\right)}^2+3{\left(4+4\right)}^2+1{\left(3+3\right)}^2+1{\left(1+2\right)}^2=954\end{array}$

vi) By applying forgotten index (F) and the provided edge partitions E⁵ (u, v), we obtain:

$\begin{array}{l}F\left(G_5\right)=2\left(1^2+3^2\right)+7\left(2^2+3^2\right)+4\left(2^2+2^2\right)+10\left(1^2+4^2\right)+4\left(3^2+4^2\right)+3\left(4^2+4^2\right)+1\left(3^2+3^2\right)+1\left(1^2+2^2\right)=532\end{array}$

vii) By applying reciprocal randic index (RR) and the provided edge partitions E⁵ (u, v), we obtain:

$\begin{array}{l}RR\left(G_5\right)=2\sqrt{1\times 3}+7\sqrt{2\times 3}+4\sqrt{2\times 2}+10\sqrt{1\times 4}+4\sqrt{3\times 4}+3\sqrt{4\times 4}+1\sqrt{3\times 3}+1\sqrt{1\times 2}=78.86\end{array}$

viii) By applying randic index (RA) and the provided edge partitions E⁵ (u, v), we obtain:

$\begin{array}{l}RA\left(G_5\right)=2\sqrt{\frac{1}{1\times 3}}+7\sqrt{\frac{1}{2\times 3}}+4\sqrt{\frac{1}{2\times 2}}+10\sqrt{\frac{1}{1\times 4}}+4\sqrt{\frac{1}{3\times 4}}+3\sqrt{\frac{1}{4\times 4}}+1\sqrt{\frac{1}{3\times 3}}+1\sqrt{\frac{1}{1\times 2}}=13.98\end{array}$

ix) By applying sum connectivity index (S) and the provided edge partitions E⁵ (u, v), we obtain:

$\begin{array}{l}S\left(G_5\right)=2\sqrt{\frac{1}{1+3}}+7\sqrt{\frac{1}{2+3}}+4\sqrt{\frac{1}{2+2}}+10\sqrt{\frac{1}{1+4}}+4\sqrt{\frac{1}{3+4}}+3\sqrt{\frac{1}{4+4}}+1\sqrt{\frac{1}{3+3}}+1\sqrt{\frac{1}{1+2}}=14.21\end{array}$

x) By applying geometric arithmetic index (GA) and the provided edge partitions E⁵ (u, v), we obtain:

$\begin{array}{l}GA\left(G_5\right)=2\left(2\frac{\sqrt{1\times 3}}{1+3}\right)+2\left(7\frac{\sqrt{2\times 3}}{2+3}\right)+2\left(4\frac{\sqrt{2\times 2}}{2+2}\right)+2\left(10\frac{\sqrt{1\times 4}}{1+4}\right)+2\left(4\frac{\sqrt{3\times 4}}{3+4}\right)+2\left(3\frac{\sqrt{4\times 4}}{4+4}\right)\\ +2\left(1\frac{\sqrt{3\times 3}}{3+3}\right)+2\left(1\frac{\sqrt{1\times 2}}{1+2}\right)=29.5\end{array}$

xi) By applying atom bond connectivity index (ABC) and the provided edge partitions E⁵ (u, v), we obtain:

$\begin{array}{l}ABC\left(G_5\right)=2\sqrt{\frac{1+3-2}{1\times 3}}+7\sqrt{\frac{2+3-2}{2\times 3}}+4\sqrt{\frac{2+2-2}{2\times 2}}+10\sqrt{\frac{1+4-2}{1\times 4}}+4\sqrt{\frac{3+4-2}{3\times 4}}+3\sqrt{\frac{4+4-2}{4\times 4}}\\ +1\sqrt{\frac{3+3-2}{3\times 3}}+1\sqrt{\frac{1+2-2}{1\times 2}}=23.94\end{array}$

The topological indices for five sulfonamide derivatives can be derived using a technique similar to that employed in Theorem 1, 2, 3,4, and Theorem 5, albeit with distinct topological indices. In Table 2, we have computed values for these indices, along with a comprehensive list of values for all medicines.

Table 2

Table 2. Molecular descriptors for the candidate compounds.

2.1.1 Models of regression for first zagreb index M₁(G)

Melting Point = 401.739979445015–1.45786228160329 [M₁(G)]

Formula Weight = 327.945883864337 + 0.185578108941419 [M₁(G)]

2.1.2 Models of regression for first zagreb index M₂(G)

Melting Point = 392.229215752272–1.16358128576237 [M₂(G)]

Formula Weight = 368.553655334904–0.053093234601144 [M₂(G)]

2.1.3 Models of regression for second zagreb index ^mM₂(G)

Melting Point = 395.746667875601–36.1592166107535 [^mM₂(G)]

Formula Weight = 283.74487245746 + 11.6306857678243 [^mM₂(G)]

2.1.4 Models of regression for harmonic index H(G)

Melting Point = 412.460456296563–19.4222092308615 [H(G)]

Formula Weight = 279.663069658677 + 6.14586050276565 [H(G)]

2.1.5 Models of regression for hyper zagreb index HM(G)

Melting Point = 381.262784438463–0.247899845037109 [HM(G)]

Formula Weight = 361.338523366773–0.00363571486828149 [HM(G)]

2.1.6 Models of regression for forgotten index F(G)

Melting Point = 369.886126342673–0.425261023060167 [F(G)]

Formula Weight = 357.286639375047 + 0.00180331255164138 [F(G)]

2.1.7 Models of regression for reciporcal randic index RR(G)

Melting Point = 398.050582636146–3.05465528351609 [RR(G)]

Formula Weight = 327.13593281809 + 0.405570233781015 [RR(G)]

2.1.8 Models of regression for randic index RA(G)

Melting Point = 438.484955174762–19.8181457103949 [RA(G)]

Formula Weight = 289.559269575579 + 4.96013958238766 [RA(G)]

2.1.9 Models of regression for sum connectivity S(G)

Melting Point = 412.040944213121–17.4986534915999 [S(G)]

Formula Weight = 291.494041389597 + 4.71056801938973 [S(G)]

2.1.10 Models of regression for geometric arithmetic index GA(G)

Melting Point = 395.647832235126–7.83944105482153 [GA(G)]

Formula Weight = 292.301160109422 + 2.2325866123323 [GA(G)]

2.1.11 Models of regression for ABC index ABC(G)

Melting Point = 412.683250150638–10.6094885116929 [ABC(G)]

Formula Weight = 303.014847528394 + 2.35634358053184 [ABC(G)]

In a quantitative structure analysis, the comparison of topological indices and correlation coefficients of physicochemical parameters is essential. Table 3 provides the physicochemical characteristics of cancer medications, while Table 1 displays the calculated TI values derived from their molecular structures. The association correlation coefficients between TIs and two physicochemical characteristics are enumerated in Table 4. Figure 3 depicts the correlation among the topological index (TIs) and the physical and chemical characteristics of compounds, including their corresponding correlation coefficients.

Table 3

Table 3. The physical characteristics of compounds.

Table 4

Table 4. Correlation coefficients (Cc).

Figure 3

Figure 3. Physicochemical properties and TIs.

2.2 Calculation of statistical metrics/parameters

In our study, quantitative structure-property relationship (QSPR) modeling is conducted to establish a correlation between the physical and chemical properties of cancer compounds as well as their determined topological indices (TIs) of degree-based, the model of regression incorporates topological features as the independent variable. In this model, “B” stands for the constant of model, “r” indicates the correlation coefficient, and “N” signifies the number of sample compounds.

The theoretical and experimental computations highlighted in the tables emphasize a significant correlation coefficient. This testing methodology proves useful for comparisons between various models and evaluating their comparative enhancements. It is noteworthy that, in the majority of cases, the p-value exceeds 0.05, and the value of r surpasses 0.6. Hence, these findings suggest the significance of all attributes.

Tables 5–15 present the statistical parameters, with the abbreviations PP used for physiochemical properties, MP for melting point, and FW for formula weight.

Table 5

Table 5. The utilization of statistical parameters in QSPR model for M₁(G).

Table 6

Table 6. The utilization of statistical parameters in the QSPR model for M₂(G).

Table 7

Table 7. The utilization of statistical parameters in the QSPR model for ^mM₂(G).

Table 8

Table 8. The utilization of statistical parameters in the QSPR model for H(G).

Table 9

Table 9. The utilization of statistical parameters in the QSPR model for HM(G).

Table 10

Table 10. The utilization of statistical parameters in the QSPR model for F(G).

Table 11

Table 11. The utilization of statistical parameters in the QSPR model for RR(G).

Table 12

Table 12. The utilization of statistical parameters in the QSPR model for RA(G).

Table 13

Table 13. The utilization of statistical parameters in the QSPR model for S(G).

Table 14

Table 14. The utilization of statistical parameters in the QSPR model for GA(G).

Table 15

Table 15. The utilization of statistical parameters in the QSPR model for ABC(G).

2.3 Standard error of approximation (SE) and resemblance

Standard error (S.E), as presented in below table (Table 16), serves as an indicator of the extent to which an analysis deviates from the approximated regression line. It also offers insights into the accuracy of predictions derived from the regression line. For additional comparisons, both practically and in theory determined predictions of the models, focusing on their physical and chemical characteristics, are included in Tables 17,18.

Table 16

Table 16. Standard error of the approximation.

Table 17

Table 17. Comparison of actual and computed values for melting point from regression models.

Table 18

Table 18. Comparison of actual and computed values for formula weight from regression models.

3 Conclusion

The utilization of topological indices (TIs) and statistical parameters in direct quantitative structure-property relationship (QSPR) models has revealed robust correlation coefficients across various physicochemical characteristics of medications employed for addressing cancer. The outcomes of this analysis provide beneficial perspectives for the therapeutic industry, offering guidance within creating novel treatments and establishing safety precautions for cancer therapies. The noteworthy influence of correlation coefficients between diverse topological indices (TIs) for these medications underscores the capable to predict the physical and chemical characteristics of recently identified anticancer sulfonamides compounds, especially for addressing specific cancer conditions. These results hold promise for analysts engaged in pharmaceutical research, providing a potent tool for compound discovery and development.

In particular, our analysis revealed the greatest correlation value of r = .911 for forgotten [F(G)] index with melting point, signifying its relevance. Additionally, the harmonic [H(G)] index demonstrated a substantial correlation of r = .21 with formula weight, further contributing to the understanding of these medications’ characteristics. This work not only contributes to our understanding of medications for cancer treatment but also offers practical implications for advancing pharmaceutical research and development in this critical area. In the near future, we aim to calculate the resistance distance based topological indices for the certain drugs.

Data availability statement

The original contributions presented in the study are included in the article/supplementary material, further inquiries can be directed to the corresponding author.

Author contributions

MD: Conceptualization, Data curation, Investigation, Methodology, Project administration, Resources, Software, Visualization, Writing–original draft, Writing–review and editing. TL: Conceptualization, Data curation, Investigation, Methodology, Project administration, Resources, Visualization, Writing–original draft, Writing–review and editing. FA: Conceptualization, Data curation, Formal Analysis, Investigation, Methodology, Writing–original draft, Writing–review and editing. SZ: Conceptualization, Data curation, Formal Analysis, Investigation, Methodology, Project administration, Resources, Software, Supervision, Validation, Visualization, Writing–original draft, Writing–review and editing.

Funding

The author(s) declare that no financial support was received for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.

Publisher’s note

All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article, or claim that may be made by its manufacturer, is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.

References

Arockiaraj, M., Celin Fiona, J., Abraham, J., Klavžar, S., and Balasubramanian, K. (2024c). Guanidinium and hydrogen carbonate rosette layers: distance and degree topological indices, Szeged-type indices, entropies, and NMR spectral patterns. Heliyon 10 (3), e24814. doi:10.1016/j.heliyon.2024.e24814

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Arockiaraj, M., Fiona, J. C., and Shalini, A. J. (2024b). Comparative study of entropies in silicate and oxide frameworks. Silicon, 1–12. doi:10.1007/s12633-024-02892-2

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Arockiaraj, M., Raza, Z., Maaran, A., Abraham, J., and Balasubramanian, K. (2024a). Comparative analysis of scaled entropies and topological properties of triphenylene-based metal and covalent organic frameworks. Chem. Pap., 1–24. doi:10.1007/s11696-023-03295-0

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Aslam, A., Bashir, Y., Ahmad, S., and Gao, W. (2017). On topological indices of certain dendrimer structures. Z. für Naturforsch. A 72 (6), 559–566. doi:10.1515/zna-2017-0081

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Boufas, W., Dupont, N., Berredjem, M., Berrezag, K., Becheker, I., Berredjem, H., et al. (2014). Synthesis and antibacterial activity of sulfonamides. SAR and DFT studies. J. Mol. Struct. 1074, 180–185. doi:10.1016/j.molstruc.2014.05.066

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Burger, A., and Abraham, D. J. (2003) Burger's medicinal chemistry and drug discovery. No Title).

Google Scholar

Cheng, X.-C., Wang, Q., Fang, H., and Xu, W. F. (2008). Role of sulfonamide group in matrix metalloproteinase inhibitors. Curr. Med. Chem. 15 (4), 368–373. doi:10.2174/092986708783497300

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Chidambaram, N., Kamran, M., Balasubramanian, D., Hameed, S., Mehmood, S., Raza, W., et al. (2024). Novel distance-based molecular descriptors for styrene butadiene rubber structures. JTAM J. Teori Dan. Apl. Mat. 8 (2), 411–424. doi:10.31764/jtam.v8i2.20037

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Crespo, R., de Bravo, M. G., Colinas, P. A., and Bravo, R. D. (2010). In vitro antitumor activity of N-glycosyl sulfonamides. Bioorg. Med. Chem. Lett. 20 (22), 6469–6471. doi:10.1016/j.bmcl.2010.09.052

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Danish, M., Akhtar, A., Ashfaq, M., Arshad, M. N., and Asiri, A. M. (2021). Synthesis crystal structure and spectral properties of new sulfonamides. J. Chem. Crystallogr. 51, 543–552. doi:10.1007/s10870-021-00878-1

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Danish, M., Bibi, A., Gilani, K., Raza, M. A., Ashfaq, M., Arshad, M. N., et al. (2019). Antiradical, antimicrobial and enzyme inhibition evaluation of sulfonamide derived esters; synthesis, X-Ray analysis and DFT studies. J. Mol. Struct. 1175, 379–388. doi:10.1016/j.molstruc.2018.07.116

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Danish, M., Tahir, M. N., Hussain, A., Ashfaq, M., and Sadiq, M. N. (2015a). Crystal structure of 4-{[(naphthalen-2-yl) sulfonylamino] methyl} cyclohexanecarboxylic acid. Acta Crystallogr. Sect. E Crystallogr. Commun. 71 (3), o145. doi:10.1107/s2056989015002054

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Danish, M., Tahir, M. N., Jabeen, N., and Raza, M. A. (2015b). Crystal structure of (2S)-3-methyl-2-[(naphthalen-1-ylsulfonyl) amino] butanoic acid. Acta Crystallogr. Sect. E Crystallogr. Commun. 71 (5), o308. doi:10.1107/s2056989015007057

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Das, B., Reddy, V. S., and Reddy, M. R. (2004). An efficient and selective tosylation of alcohols with p-toluenesulfonic acid. Tetrahedron Lett. 45 (36), 6717–6719. doi:10.1016/j.tetlet.2004.07.076

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Das, K. C., Gutman, I., and Furtula, B. (2011). On atom-bond connectivity index. Chem. Phys. Lett. 511 (4-6), 452–454. doi:10.1016/j.cplett.2011.06.049

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Duchowicz, P. R., Talevi, A., Bruno-Blanch, L. E., and Castro, E. A. (2008). New QSPR study for the prediction of aqueous solubility of drug-like compounds. Bioorg. Med. Chem. 16 (17), 7944–7955. doi:10.1016/j.bmc.2008.07.067

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Fajtlowicz, S. (1988). “On conjectures of Graffiti,” in Annals of discrete mathematics (Elsevier), 113–118.

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Farahani, M. R. (2013). On the Randic and sum-connectivity index of nanotubes. Ann. West Univ. Timisoara-Mathematics Comput. Sci. 51 (2), 39–46. doi:10.2478/awutm-2013-0014

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Furtula, B., and Gutman, I. (2015). A forgotten topological index. J. Math. Chem. 53 (4), 1184–1190. doi:10.1007/s10910-015-0480-z

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Groutas, W. C., He, S., Kuang, R., Ruan, S., Tu, J., and Chan, H. K. (2001). Inhibition of serine proteases by functionalized sulfonamides coupled to the 1, 2, 5-thiadiazolidin-3-one 1, 1 dioxide scaffold. Bioorg. Med. Chem. 9 (6), 1543–1548. doi:10.1016/s0968-0896(01)00037-2

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Gutman, I., Furtula, B., and Elphick, C. (2014) “Three new/old vertex-degree-based topological indices,” in MATCH communications in mathematical and in computer chemistry.

Google Scholar

Gutman, I., Furtula, B., and Katanić, V. (2018). Randić index and information. AKCE Int. J. Graphs Comb. 15 (3), 307–312. doi:10.1016/j.akcej.2017.09.006

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Gutman, I., and Polansky, O. E. (2012) Mathematical concepts in organic chemistry. Springer Science and Business Media.

Google Scholar

Gutman, I., and Trinajstić, N. (1972). Graph theory and molecular orbitals. Total φ-electron energy of alternant hydrocarbons. Chem. Phys. Lett. 17 (4), 535–538. doi:10.1016/0009-2614(72)85099-1

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Hansen, P. J., and Jurs, P. C. (1988). Chemical applications of graph theory. Part I. Fundamentals and topological indices. J. Chem. Educ. 65 (7), 574. doi:10.1021/ed065p574

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Hayat, S., Arshad, M., and Khan, A. (2024b). Graphs with given connectivity and their minimum Sombor index having applications to QSPR studies of monocarboxylic acids. Heliyon 10 (1), e23392. doi:10.1016/j.heliyon.2023.e23392

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Hayat, S., Khan, A., Ali, K., and Liu, J. B. (2024a). Structure-property modeling for thermodynamic properties of benzenoid hydrocarbons by temperature-based topological indices. Ain Shams Eng. J. 15 (3), 102586. doi:10.1016/j.asej.2023.102586

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Hosamani, S., Perigidad, D., Jamagoud, S., Maled, Y., and Gavade, S. (2017). QSPR analysis of certain degree based topological indices. J. Statistics Appl. Probab. 6 (2), 361–371. doi:10.18576/jsap/060211

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Markgren, P.-O., Schaal, W., Hämäläinen, M., Karlén, A., Hallberg, A., Samuelsson, B., et al. (2002). Relationships between structure and interaction kinetics for HIV-1 protease inhibitors. J. Med. Chem. 45 (25), 5430–5439. doi:10.1021/jm0208370

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Mohammed, M. A., Atan, K. A., Khalaf, A. M., Said, M. R., and Hasni, R. (2016). “On atom bond connectivity index of some molecular graphs,” in AIP conference proceedings (AIP Publishing), 1739, No. 1.

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Natarajan, C., Selvamuthukumaran, S., and Farahani, M. R. (2022) On leap Zagreb indices of some cycle related graphs.

Google Scholar

Penning, T. D., Talley, J. J., Bertenshaw, S. R., Carter, J. S., Collins, P. W., Docter, S., et al. (1997). Synthesis and biological evaluation of the 1, 5-diarylpyrazole class of cyclooxygenase-2 inhibitors: identification of 4-[5-(4-methylphenyl)-3-(trifluoromethyl)-1 H-pyrazol-1-yl] benzenesulfonamide (SC-58635, celecoxib). J. Med. Chem. 40 (9), 1347–1365. doi:10.1021/jm960803q

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Ramírez Alfaro, J. J. (2022) Estudio de La concentración de metales en el proceso de una empresa productora de premezclas alimenticias granuladas.

Google Scholar

Rotella, D. P. (2002). Phosphodiesterase 5 inhibitors: current status and potential applications. Nat. Rev. Drug Discov. 1 (9), 674–682. doi:10.1038/nrd893

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Shanmukha, M., Usha, A., Praveen, B. M., and Douhadji, A. (2022). Degree-based molecular descriptors and QSPR analysis of breast cancer drugs. J. Math. 2022, 1–13. doi:10.1155/2022/5880011

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Shirdel, G., Rezapour, H., and Sayadi, A. (2013) The hyper-Zagreb index of graph operations.

Google Scholar

Supuran, C. T., and Scozzafava, A. (2002). Applications of carbonic anhydrase inhibitors and activators in therapy. Expert Opin. Ther. Pat. 12 (2), 217–242. doi:10.1517/13543776.12.2.217

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Talley, J. J., Brown, D. L., Carter, J. S., Graneto, M. J., Koboldt, C. M., Masferrer, J. L., et al. (2000). 4-[5-Methyl-3-phenylisoxazol-4-yl]-benzenesulfonamide, valdecoxib: a potent and selective inhibitor of COX-2. J. Med. Chem. 43 (5), 775–777. doi:10.1021/jm990577v

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Ullah, A., Zaman, S., Hamraz, A., and Muzammal, M. (2023a). On the construction of some bioconjugate networks and their structural modeling via irregularity topological indices. Eur. Phys. J. E 46 (8), 72. doi:10.1140/epje/s10189-023-00333-3

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Ullah, A., Zaman, S., Hussain, A., Jabeen, A., and Belay, M. B. (2023b). Derivation of mathematical closed form expressions for certain irregular topological indices of 2D nanotubes. Sci. Rep. 13 (1), 11187. doi:10.1038/s41598-023-38386-1

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Vukičević, D., and Furtula, B. (2009). Topological index based on the ratios of geometrical and arithmetical means of end-vertex degrees of edges. J. Math. Chem. 46, 1369–1376. doi:10.1007/s10910-009-9520-x

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Wiener, H. (1947). Structural determination of paraffin boiling points. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 69 (1), 17–20. doi:10.1021/ja01193a005

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Winum, J. Y., Scozzafava, A., Montero, J. L., and Supuran, C. T. (2006). Therapeutic potential of sulfamides as enzyme inhibitors. Med. Res. Rev. 26 (6), 767–792. doi:10.1002/med.20068

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Yan, T., Kosar, Z., Aslam, A., Zaman, S., and Ullah, A. (2023). Spectral techniques and mathematical aspects of K 4 chain graph. Phys. Scr. 98 (4), 045222. doi:10.1088/1402-4896/acc4f0

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Zaman, S., and He, X. (2022). Relation between the inertia indices of a complex unit gain graph and those of its underlying graph. Linear Multilinear Algebra 70 (5), 843–877. doi:10.1080/03081087.2020.1749224

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Zaman, S., Jalani, M., Ullah, A., Ahmad, W., and Saeedi, G. (2023). Mathematical analysis and molecular descriptors of two novel metal–organic models with chemical applications. Sci. Rep. 13 (1), 5314. doi:10.1038/s41598-023-32347-4

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Zhong, J., Gan, X., Alliston, K. R., Lai, Z., Yu, H., Groutas, C. S., et al. (2004). Potential protease inhibitors based on a functionalized cyclic sulfamide scaffold. J. Comb. Chem. 6 (4), 556–563. doi:10.1021/cc030047r

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar