Secondary flows have a huge impact on losses generation in modern low pressure gas turbines (LPTs). At design point, the interaction of the blade profile with the end-wall boundary layer is responsible for up to 40% of total losses. Therefore, predicting accurately the end-wall flow field in a LPT is extremely important in the industrial design phase. Since the inlet boundary layer profile is one of the factors which most affects the evolution of secondary flows, the first main objective of the present work is to investigate the impact of two different inlet conditions on the end-wall flow field of the T106A, a well known LPT cascade. The first condition, labeled in the paper as C1, is represented by uniform conditions at the inlet plane and the second, C2, by a flow characterized by a defined inlet boundary layer profile. The code used for the simulations is based on the Discontinuous Galerkin (DG) formulation and solves the Reynolds-averaged Navier-Stokes (RANS) equations coupled with the Spalart Allmaras turbulence model. Secondly, this work aims at estimating the influence of viscosity and turbulence on the T106A end-wall flow field. In order to do so, RANS results are compared with those obtained from an inviscid simulation with a prescribed inlet total pressure profile, which mimics a boundary layer. A comparison between C1 and C2 results highlights an influence of secondary flows on the flow field up to a significant distance from the end-wall. In particular, the C2 end-wall flow field appears to be characterized by greater over turning and under turning angles and higher total pressure losses. Furthermore, the C2 simulated flow field shows good agreement with experimental and numerical data available in literature. The C2 and inviscid Euler computed flow fields, although globally comparable, present evident differences. The cascade passage simulated with inviscid flow is mainly dominated by a single large and homogeneous vortex structure, less stretched in the spanwise direction and closer to the end-wall than vortical structures computed by compressible flow simulation. It is reasonable, then, asserting that for the chosen test case a great part of the secondary flows details is strongly dependent on viscous phenomena and turbulence.