PURPOSE There are currently limited objective criteria to help assist physicians in determining whether an individual patient with acute myeloid leukemia (AML) is likely to do better with induction with either standard 7 + 3 chemotherapy or targeted therapy with venetoclax plus azacitidine. The study goal was to address this need by developing exploratory clinical decision support methods. PATIENTS AND METHODS Univariable and multivariable analysis as well as comparison of a range of machine learning (ML) predictors were performed using cohorts of 120 newly diagnosed 7 + 3-treated AML patients compared with 101 venetoclax plus azacitidine–treated patients. RESULTS A variety of features in the two patient cohorts were identified that may potentially correlate with short- and long-term outcomes, toxicities, and other considerations. A subset of these diagnostic features was then used to develop ML-based predictors with relatively high areas under the curve of short- and long-term outcomes, hospital stays, transfusion requirements, and toxicities for individual patients treated with either venetoclax/azacitidine or 7 + 3. CONCLUSION Potential ML-based approaches to clinical decision support to help guide individual patients with newly diagnosed AML to either 7 + 3 or venetoclax plus azacitidine induction therapy were identified. Larger cohorts with separate test and validation studies are necessary to confirm these initial findings.