The last 12 verses of Mark have long been a subject of debate, with 3 viewpoints emerging as most common:
They represent the original ending of the Gospel, as written by Mark
They were written by another author who was considered sufficiently authoritative to speak on the matter
They represent a later addition to the text
For my part, I do not believe Mark intended to end his Gospel at 16:8--the word γάρ (for/since) would be a very unusual way to end a book. If Mark really did end with the word γάρ, it would be the only document of its kind from all of Greco-Roman literature to do so--there would be 0 corroborating evidence for such a practice. Further discussion on the problems with 16:8 as the originally intended ending of Mark's Gospel is found here on my channel.
Whatever Mark may have intended, however, does not in fact answer the question you have raised. Let’s take a look at the implications using each of the three scenarios outlined above.
The last twelve verses are original
In this case the answer to the OP depends on one’s solution to the Synoptic Problem--if Mark is dependent upon Luke, such as is proposed by the Two-Gospel Hypothesis, then the entirety of Mark, including the last 12 verses, was influenced by Luke. If Mark is not dependent upon Luke (e.g. Two-Document Hypothesis, Farrer Hypothesis), then no, the last 12 verses of Mark do not derive from Luke.
This possibility is examined in depth by Peabody in “One Gospel from Two--Mark’s Use of Matthew and Luke” (pp. 328-335), who considers the originality of the last twelve verses possible.
The last twelve verses are written by a second authoritative author
The answer in this case differs very little from the previous section--the last 12 verses could be derived from earlier Gospels (if that’s how we solve the Synoptic Problem), or it could be based on separate eyewitness testimony.
This view is supported by a 10th century Armenian manuscript naming Aristion as the author of the last 12 verse (see here). This has been taken by many to refer to the same Aristion noted by Papias as an eyewitness disciple of Jesus.
The last 12 verses are a later addition to the text
In this case it does indeed look possible for almost everything in these 12 verses to have been derived from the other Gospels + Acts--but not from the Gospel of Luke alone.
As noted in the OP, the reference to Mary having 7 devils cast out of her could come from Luke, and verses 11-12 may well be based on the appearance to the two disciples on the road to Emmaus.
Here’s a summary of plausible sources for the material in the last 12 verses, which could be read as a very concise summary of much more extended narratives in the other Gospels and Acts.
Verse 9: appearance to Mary first - John 20:1; that Mary had 7 devils cast out - Luke 8:2
Verse 10: John 20:2, loosely from Matthew & Luke as well
Verse 11: Luke 24:11
Verses 12-13: Road to Emmaus, Luke 24:13-32
Verse 14: Luke 24:33-43
Verse 15: Matthew 28:19-20
Verses 16-20: These are a little harder to place directly, though nearly everything in these verses is also found in Acts
I have no difficulty believing that the Gospels are based on eyewitness testimony, though that is an extensive question in and of itself (my thoughts here). I would not be surprised if the last 12 verses of Mark were influenced by the other Gospels, but that doesn't rule out eyewitness source material at all. I personally believe the Gospel of Mark used both Matthew & Luke as sources, making the question of reliance upon them in the last 12 verses moot.
My own view on the Synoptic Problem is described here, wherein the entire Gospel of Mark, not just the last 12 verses, presuppose knowledge of the Gospels of Matthew & Luke.