  Background: Subgroup analyses are frequently conducted in randomized clinical
trials to assess evidence of heterogeneous treatment effect across patient
subpopulations. Although randomization balances covariates within subgroups in
expectation, chance imbalance may be amplified in small subgroups and harm the
precision. Covariate adjustment in overall analysis of RCT is often conducted,
via either ANCOVA or propensity score weighting, but for subgroup analysis has
been rarely discussed. In this article, we develop propensity score weighting
methodology for covariate adjustment to improve the precision and power of
subgroup analyses in RCTs. Methods: We extend the propensity score weighting
methodology to subgroup analyses by fitting a logistic propensity model with
pre-specified covariate-subgroup interactions. We show that, by construction,
overlap weighting exactly balances the covariates with interaction terms in
each subgroup. Extensive simulations were performed to compare the operating
characteristics of unadjusted, different propensity score weighting and the
ANCOVA estimator. We apply these methods to the HF-ACTION trial to evaluate the
effect of exercise training on 6-minute walk test in pre-specified subgroups.
Results: Standard errors of the adjusted estimators are smaller than those of
the unadjusted estimator. The propensity score weighting estimator is as
efficient as ANCOVA, and is often more efficient when subgroup sample size is
small (e.g.<125), and/or when outcome model is misspecified. The weighting
estimators with full-interaction propensity model consistently outperform the
standard main-effect propensity model. Conclusion: Propensity score weighting
is a transparent and objective method to adjust chance imbalance of important
covariates in subgroup analyses of RCTs. It is crucial to include the full
covariate-subgroup interactions in the propensity score model.
