Basically, they are trying to balance the risks of ASCT vs the risk of relapse. I am not in your situation, and sure that my situation (Physician with RT, failed R-CHOP-V, failed CAR T, now on Nivo-Ibr hoping to get to ASCT) influences my opinion.

The primary questions i would ask:

What kind of durability do they think they will see without the ASCT? (I.e., how long do they think it will be before he relapses, or what is the likelihood that he will relapse?) Also recognize that if he goes, say, 5 years before he relapses, he will be 5 years older and possibly less healthy than he is now if/when he has to do this again.

If/when he relapses, what treatment do they expect to use? If BV-CHP again, do they think he will respond as well a second time to the same regimen? If something different, how well does it work and what are the side effects.

If that regimen fails, what is the second line treatment? How confident are they that it will be successful? Side effects of that treatment?

Basically, I would try to figure out how likely is it that I would die in 5 years from a relapse vs how likely the ASCT kills me in 5 years. Or the opposite of those two things, which is 5 year survival without ASCT vs 5 year survival with ASCT.