Trientine is a second-line copper chelator for Wilson disease, kept in reserve for people who develop intolerance or toxicity to penicillamine. Let us test the statement that the question wants us to flag as false.
The claim in option B holds up. Trientine is precisely the recognised substitute when penicillamine cannot be continued, which is why both drugs exist for the same indication.
The claim in option C also holds. Since trientine grabs onto metal ions, it will chelate iron from any oral iron supplement taken too close to it. Clinical advice is to keep a gap of about two hours between the two so each is absorbed properly.
The claim in option D is correct as well. With prolonged use, trientine can remove enough iron to produce iron deficiency anemia, so iron status is monitored.
That leaves option A. Two errors are packed into it. First, trientine is a weaker copper chelator than penicillamine, not a more potent one. Second, its oral bioavailability is poor, so describing it as well absorbed is also incorrect. Both halves of that statement are wrong, making it the exception the question is asking for.
\[\boxed{\text{More potent than penicillamine and orally absorbed (option A)}}\]