Evidence Hub

Recommendations for the diagnosis and management of cln3 disease (batten disease) using the Delphi consensus methodology

Mink JW, Adams HR, Ahrens-Nicklas R, Andersen BN, Augustine E, Boustany RM, Cooper JD, Levin A et al.

Orphanet journal of rare diseases, 2026

4 citations

Abstract

BACKGROUND: CLN3 disease, also called Juvenile Neuronal Ceroid Lipofuscinosis (JNCL), or Batten disease, is an ultra‑rare, neurodegenerative lysosomal storage disorder generally affecting individuals during the first decade of life. There can be a delay in diagnosis or misdiagnosis due to a lack of awareness, and when the most common presenting symptom of visual loss is attributed to more common conditions affecting vision. METHODS: We used a previously published Expert Mapping Tool (EMT) to identify multidisciplinary professionals with diagnostic or clinical management expertise, as well as patient advocates with experience of CLN3 disease. A systematic literature review of published evidence using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta‑Analyses (PRISMA) guidance was conducted independently and simultaneously to develop key clinical care statements. Each statement was based on the strength of the evidence. The statements formed the basis of an international modified-Delphi consensus process using a virtual meeting platform (Within3). Experts were asked to agree or disagree with each statement and suggest any changes. Statements that reached a consensus of 75% or over are the guiding statements within this manuscript. The processes and manuscript have been independently assessed using the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation (AGREE II) criteria. RESULTS: Thirty‑nine international experts from eight specialities were identified, including…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a systematic review, done in people. Its evidence level is 1 of 5 (Highest · pooled evidence). Pooled evidence from several studies sits at the top of the evidence pyramid.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free