https://alexpoulos.com/2019/08/28/text- ... -on-ps-77/
So we see that the devil plots against the scriptures, but we must not, therefore, rashly resort to correcting the text. For Marcion suffered from something of this sort in supposing that the scriptures were in error and that the devil had brought about additions. So he entrusted himself with the task of correcting the scripture. In so doing, he cut out from the foundations necessary parts of the gospels, like the birth of the savior, and countless others, like the visions and prophecies, and necessary parts of the apostle.
Unlike those who claimed that Marcion had singled out Luke in order to corrupt it, here Origen claims that Marcion had removed the essentials (τὰ ἀναγκαῖα) "of the gospels" (τῶν εὐαγγελίων) and "of the apostle" (τοῦ ἀποστόλου).
It shouldn't be supposed that Origen had a historical tradition that he's citing, but nonetheless Origen characterizes the work of Marcion as having good intentions but being rash in its corrections. Notably, Origen says "of the gospels" (τῶν εὐαγγελίων), not of the gospel or of Luke. Origen wouldn't need a prior tradition for this either, given that Origen may have known a little about the text. For example, I just posted about a neglected Marcionite gospel reference that is preserved in Origen's Homily on Luke:
viewtopic.php?f=3&t=11984
This is a reference to material that isn't in Luke. However Origen obtained his knowledge about the text, he was capable enough as a critic to be able to draw a conclusion that Marcion did not use Luke exclusively. The passage suggests that he so concluded.