Political advocacy groups are usually single-issue in order to not dilute their message and not exclude potential supporters for their primary cause who might object to another cause the group supports. So when an organization is primarily formed around one specific issue, then they usually avoid taking an official stance on an unrelated issue.
There are a lot of pro-choice advocacy groups in the United States, so mentioning them all would be an exercise in futility. So I am going to just look at a couple representative examples. I am focusing specifically on the US, because there is hardly another country in the world where abortion is such a dividing hot-button issue.
Center for Reproductive Rights
In their article on assisted reproduction, they state:
The Center’s work on assisted reproduction—including IVF, surrogacy, and embryo and gamete regulations—seeks to destigmatize infertility and ensure equitable access to infertility care.
So yes, they support surrogacy motherhood.
Looking for articles on their website containing the word "prostitution" doesn't give a lot of results, and the articles usually only mention the topic in a single sentence, usually in the context of forced prostitution. Which even pro-prostitution advocacy groups usually condemn. So no clear position here.
National Abortion Federation
This group appears to be clearly single-issue on the topic of advocating for the right to abortions, providing information on abortion and providing access to them. I could not find anything on any other political subject on their website.
Although PP is most known for providing abortions, it's an organization which does a whole lot more than just that. It deals with almost all aspects of reproductive health care. Yet, their abortion services are what makes them the bogeyman of the pro-life movement. So their positions on abortions are in the spotlight of the pro-choice movement, whether they want it or not.
They describe gestational surrogacy as:
an option for women who do not want to or cannot carry a pregnancy. Surrogacy can entail use of the surrogate’s uterus and eggs or only her uterus.
As with their usual medial style, they inform and offer, but not advocate for or against specific options.
Regarding sex work: The glossary on their website acknowledge that it exists, but there are not many mentions of it on their website. All I could find is this secondary source (which appears to be critical of PP) which claims:
The clinic’s unofficial position on prostitution was identical to its stance concerning abortion. A woman had the right to choose what she did with her body. Period. End of story. We were trained to think that prostitution or stripping was as valid a choice for a woman as being a nurse or a lawyer.
I could also find this tweet from Planned Parenthood Toronto (so not the US branch) which says:
What is our position on #SexWork? Sex work is real work and we support sex workers’ rights. We believe that sex workers deserve sexual and reproductive health services that are inclusive, non-judgemental, and relevant to their needs.
Feminist Majority Foundation
The FMF is a catch-all Feminist organization which is also a major player in the pro-choice movement.
All I could find regarding surrogacy on their website is an article about the ban of surrogate motherhood in Italy which while not clearly advocating for surrogate motherhood, appears to be more favorable than unfavorable of it.
Their position on sex work appears to be ambiguous. Their website has only 3 articles tagged as "sex work". One of them is about a debate between Amnesty International and the Coalition Against Trafficking in Women titled "Amnesty Votes on Policy to Decriminalize Sex Work, Sparks Feminist Debate". The article doesn't take a clear position, but judging by the amount of verbatim quotes in the article, they appears slightly more favorable of the position of the CATW to ban sex work than that of AI to legalize it.
NARAL - Pro Choice America
I could find some statements where Pro Choice America condemned opposition to surrogacy motherhood as a sign of being "anti-choice" and therefore worth condemning.
I could find some dossiers on their website where they summarize the positions of various district court attorney on the abortion debate:
Pitlyk has represented a number of anti-choice activist organizations in cases involving the validity of surrogacy agreements. In her briefs, Pitlyk stated that “[s]urrogacy raises an array of troubling issues.”
Ashe served on the board of Christian Health Ministries Foundation (CHM) [...] According to its membership guidelines, CHM refuses to cover birth control, fertility treatment, surrogate procedures, sterilization, reversal procedures, and abortion
There is also a pamphlet "The insidious power of the anti-choice movement" which states:
These anti-choice activists have been working hard to set the stage for even more aggressive attacks on our reproductive freedom. [...] But as we’ve always said, reducing these players and this infrastructure to "anti-choice" is a misnomer as their ideology and their agenda exceeds well beyond ending legal abortion in our country. Even in areas of reproduction, they actively fight access to contraception, in vitro fertilization, and surrogacy.
So it appears that they consider opposition to surrogate motherhood an anti-choice position and therefore irreconcilable with their core issue.
I could not find anything which hints on their position on sex work.
It appears that most organizations which are pro-choice also consider surrogacy motherhood a reproductive right worth protecting.
But their positions on sex work are usually ambiguous. And with those organizations within the movement who do have a position, those positions are not consistent between organizations.